<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Re: [Vision2020] low wages?</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<STYLE type=text/css>BLOCKQUOTE {
PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
DL {
PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
UL {
PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
OL {
PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
LI {
PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
</STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.5730.11" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>And there we have it, the standardized mantra of
the left. Wal-Mart is bad 'cause corporations are bad 'cause conservatives are
bad cause Republicans are bad 'cause capitalism is bad etc. etc.
etc.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>As long as the name of the game is dueling
newspaper articles...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV id=normalpadding>
<H2>Wal-Mart posse: Why the unions are on the attack</H2><FONT size=4><FONT
color=#888888><SPAN class=pubdate>Monday, October 23,
2006</SPAN><BR></FONT></FONT>
<DIV class=text>The Wall Street Journal
<P>Wal-Mart may be expanding in the People's Republic of China, but here in
capitalist America the low-price retailer has become the Democratic Party's
favorite pinata. The media like to portray this as a populist uprising against
heartless big business. But what they don't bother to disclose is that this
entire get-Wal-Mart campaign is a political operation led and funded by
organized labor.
<P>We've done a little digging into the two most prominent anti-Wal-Mart groups,
and they might as well operate out of AFL-CIO headquarters. An outfit called
Wal-Mart Watch was created by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU),
probably the most powerful union in America after the National Education
Association. Wal-Mart Watch is backed by Five Stones, a 501(c)3 organization
that received $2,775,000 in 2005 from the SEIU, or 56 percent of its $5 million
budget. According to financial records, SEIU also gave Five Stones $1 million in
2004 to launch the anti-Wal-Mart group, and SEIU president Andy Stern is the
Wal-Mart Watch chairman.
<P>A second group, Wake Up Wal-Mart, is more or less a subsidiary of the United
Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW). Wake Up Wal-Mart refuses to divulge
its funding sources, but here is what we do know: The group was founded by the
UFCW, is housed at UFCW headquarters, and its campaign director's $135,000
salary is paid by the UFCW.
<P>Wake Up Wal-Mart also has close ties to the Democratic Party. Its
union-funded campaign director is Paul Blank, who was political director of
Howard Dean's failed Presidential campaign. The group sponsored a 19 state,
35-day bus tour across the U.S. earlier this year, staging anti-Wal-Mart
rallies. Nearly every major Democratic Presidential hopeful has joined in the
Wal-Mart-bashing, including Sens. Joe Biden and Evan Bayh, New Mexico Gov. Bill
Richardson, and trial lawyer-turned-man-of-the-people John Edwards. They all
seem to believe they have to take this line to pass union muster for 2008.
<P>Even Hillary Rodham Clinton has joined in the political fun. Never mind that
she served six years on the Wal-Mart board during her time in Beltway exile as
an Arkansas lawyer and, according to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, was paid
$18,000 per year plus $1,500 for every meeting near the end of her tenure. Most
recently, Mrs. Clinton returned a $5,000 campaign contribution from Wal-Mart to
protest its allegedly inadequate health care benefits. Maybe someone should ask
her if she's returned her director's pay, with interest.
<P>
<HR width="50%" noShade SIZE=1>
<P>Most of the local protests against Wal-Mart are organized through the
left-wing activist group ACORN, an acronym for the Association of Community
Organizations for Reform Now. ACORN is the group that put the squeeze on the
Chicago City Council to pass an ordinance this summer to require Wal-Mart,
Target and other big-box stores to pay a minimum $10 an hour wage and $3 an hour
in benefits by 2010. (Democratic Mayor Richard Daley vetoed the bill.) ACORN
also pretends it is a locally organized and funded voice of the downtrodden
masses. But guess where ACORN gets much of its money? Last year the SEIU chipped
in $2,125,229 and the UFCW $165,692.
<P>Then there are the anti-Wal-Mart "think tanks," if that's the right word for
these political shops - notably, the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) and the
University of California at Berkeley Labor Center. The job of these two outfits
is to publish papers backing the economic claims of Wal-Mart critics. The UC
Berkeley group recently asserted that Wal-Mart "reduces total take-home pay for
retail workers." The UC Berkeley Labor Center has received at least $43,550 from
SEIU. The Economic Policy Institute received $100,000 from the SEIU and $40,000
from the UFCW in 2005 and has published several anti-Wal-Mart studies,
particularly on the benefits of the Chicago ordinance. By the way, Andy Stern
also sits on the EPI board. He's a busy guy.
<P>Now, we're not predisposed to be pro- or anti-Wal-Mart. We've criticized
Wal-Mart lobbying on policy grounds -- for example, when the company supported a
minimum wage increase to court some nice publicity while also knowing this would
harm any lower-priced competitors. However, it is simply fallacious to argue
that Wal-Mart has harmed low-income families.
<P>More than one study has shown that the real "Wal-Mart effect" has been to
increase the purchasing power of working families by lowering prices for
groceries, prescription drugs, electronic equipment and many other products that
have become modern household necessities. One study, by the economic consulting
firm Global Insight, calculates that Wal-Mart saves American households an
average of $2,300 a year through lower prices, or a $263 billion reduction in
the cost of living. That compares with $33 billion savings for low-income
families from the federal food stamp program.
<P>
<HR width="50%" noShade SIZE=1>
<P>Alas, what's good for working families isn't always good news for unions and
their bosses. They hate Wal-Mart because its blue-coated workforce is strictly
non-union -- a policy that dates back to the day founder Sam Walton opened his
first store. Today the company employs 1.3 million American workers, and its
recent push into groceries has made life miserable for Safeway and other grocery
chains organized by the service workers or the UFCW.
<P>Wal-Mart pays an average of $10 an hour, which is more than many of its
unionized competitors offer. And typically when a new Wal-Mart store opens in a
poor area, it receives thousands of job applications for a few hundred openings.
So Wal-Mart's retail jobs of $7 to $12 an hour, which the unions deride as
"poverty wages," are actually in high demand.
<P>But as we say, this campaign isn't about "working families," or any of the
other rhapsody-for-the-common-man union slogans. If Wal-Mart were suddenly
unionized, Big Labor's membership would double overnight and union leaders would
collect an estimated $300 million in additional dues each year to sway more
politicians. Short of that, their goal is to keep Wal-Mart out of cities so
their union shops have less competition. That's what the war against Wal-Mart is
truly about.</P>
<P> </P>
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>g (with a heartfelt thanks to
T)</FONT></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=msolomon@moscow.com href="mailto:msolomon@moscow.com">Mark
Solomon</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=jampot@adelphia.net
href="mailto:jampot@adelphia.net">g. crabtree</A> ; <A
title=godshatter@yahoo.com href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com">Paul
Rumelhart</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=vision2020@moscow.com
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, February 09, 2007 9:40
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] low
wages?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>From the NYTimes: Walmart/Walton family funding of American Enterprise
Institute. m.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>The New York Times</DIV>
<DIV><BR>September 8, 2006<BR>Wal-Mart Finds an Ally in Conservatives</DIV>
<DIV>By MICHAEL BARBARO and STEPHANIE STROM<BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR>As Wal-Mart Stores struggles to rebut criticism from unions and
Democratic leaders, the company has discovered a reliable ally: prominent
conservative research groups like the American Enterprise Institute, the
Heritage Foundation and the Manhattan Institute.<BR><BR>Top policy analysts at
these groups have written newspaper opinion pieces around the country
supporting Wal-Mart, defended the company in interviews with reporters and
testified on its behalf before government committees in Washington.<BR><BR>But
the groups - and their employees - have consistently failed to disclose a tie
to the giant discount retailer: financing from the Walton Family Foundation,
which is run by the Wal-Mart founder Sam Walton's three children, who have a
controlling stake in the company.<BR><BR>The groups said the donations from
the foundation have no influence over their research, which is deliberately
kept separate from their fund-raising activities. What's more, the
pro-business philosophies of these groups often dovetail with the interests of
Wal-Mart.<BR><BR>But the financing, which totaled more than $2.5 million over
the last six years, according to data compiled by GuideStar, a research
organization, raises questions about what the research groups should disclose
to newspaper editors, reporters or government officials. The Walton Family
Foundation must disclose its annual donations in forms filed with the Internal
Revenue Service, but research groups are under no such
obligation.<BR><BR>Companies and such groups have long courted one another -
one seeking influence, the other donations - and liberal policy groups receive
significant financing from unions and left-leaning organizations without
disclosing their financing.<BR><BR>But the Walton donations could prove risky
for Wal-Mart, given its escalating public relations campaign. The company's
quiet outreach to bloggers, beginning last year, touched off a debate about
what online writers should disclose to readers, and its financing to policy
groups could do the same.<BR><BR>Asked about the donations yesterday, Mona
Williams, a spokeswoman for Wal-Mart, said, "The fact is that editorial pages
and prominent columnists of all stripes write favorably about our company
because they recognize the value we provide to working families, the job
opportunities we create and the contributions we make to the community we
serve."<BR><BR>At least five research and advocacy groups that have received
Walton Family Foundation donations are vocal advocates of the
company.<BR><BR>The American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research,
for example, has received more than $100,000 from the foundation in the last
three years, a fraction of the more than $24 million it raised in 2004
alone.<BR><BR>Richard Vedder, a visiting scholar at the institute, wrote an
opinion article for The Washington Times last month, extolling Wal-Mart's
benefits to the American economy. "There is enormous economic evidence that
Wal-Mart has helped poor and middle-class consumers, in fact more than anyone
else," Mr. Vedder wrote in the article, which prominently identified his ties
to institute.<BR><BR>But neither Mr. Vedder nor the newspaper mentioned
American Enterprise Institute's financial links to the Waltons. Mr. Vedder, a
professor at Ohio University, said he might have disclosed the relationship
had the American Enterprise Institute told him of it. "I always assumed that
A.E.I. had no relationship or a modest, distant relationship with the
company," said Mr. Vedder, who has written a forthcoming book about the
company. The book, he said in an interview yesterday, would eventually contain
a disclosure about the Walton donations to the institute.<BR><BR>A spokesman
for the Walton Family Foundation, Jay Allen, said there was no organized
campaign to build support for Wal-Mart among research groups. All of the
foundation's giving, he said, is directed toward a handful of philanthropic
issues, including school reform, the environment and the economy in Northwest
Arkansas, where Wal-Mart is based. "That is the spirit and purpose of their
giving," Mr. Allen said.</DIV>
<DIV><BR>Mr. Allen said the foundation, which had assets of $608.7 million in
2004, the last year for which data is available, has never asked the research
groups to disclose the donations because "the family leaves it up to the
individual organization to decide."<BR><BR>Those groups, for the most part,
say they have decided not to share the information with their analysts or the
public.<BR><BR>For example, Sally C. Pipes, the president of the Pacific
Research Institute, a free-market policy advocate, has written several opinion
articles defending Wal-Mart in The Miami Herald and The San Francisco
Examiner.<BR><BR>A month after a federal judge in California certified a sex
discrimination lawsuit against the company as a class action in 2004, Ms.
Pipes wrote an article in The Examiner criticizing the lawyers and the women
behind the suit. "The case against Wal-Mart," she wrote, "follows the standard
feminist stereotype of women as victims, men as villains and large
corporations as inherently evil."<BR><BR>The article did not disclose that the
Walton Family Foundation gave Pacific Research $175,000 from 1999 to 2004. Ms.
Pipes was aware of the contributions, but said the money was earmarked for an
education reform project and did not influence her thinking about the lawsuit.
Asked why she typically did not disclose the donations to newspapers, she
said: "It never occurs to me to put that out front unless I am asked. If
newspapers ask, I am completely open about it."<BR><BR>The lack of disclosure
highlights the absence of a consistent policy at the nation's newspapers about
whether contributors must tell editors of potential conflicts of
interest.<BR><BR>Juan M. Vasquez, the deputy editorial page editor of The
Miami Herald, which ran an opinion article praising Wal-Mart by Ms. Pipes of
Pacific Research, said his staff researches organizations that write opinion
articles, including their financing. But that does not always require asking
if the organization has received money from the subject of an article, he
said.<BR><BR>The New York Times has a policy of asking outside contributors to
disclose any potential conflicts of interest, including the financing for
research groups.<BR><BR>Several of the research groups noted that their
mission is to be an advocate for free market policies and less government
intrusion in business. "Those aims are pro-business, so it's not surprising
that companies would be supporters of our work," said Khristine Brookes, a
spokeswoman for the Heritage Foundation.<BR><BR>Last year, for instance, The
Baltimore Sun published an op-ed article by Tim Kane, a research fellow at
Heritage, in which he criticized Maryland's efforts to require Wal-Mart to
spend more on health care. He objected to the move on the grounds that it was
undue government interference in the free market, a traditional concern of
Heritage.<BR><BR>"The existence of Wal-Mart dented the rise in overall
inflation so much that Jerry Hausman, an economist from the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, is calling on the federal government to change the
way it measures prices," Mr. Kane wrote. "Translation: Wal-Mart is fighting
poverty faster than government accountants can keep track."<BR><BR>Ms. Brookes
pointed out that the $20,000 Heritage has received from the Walton Family
Foundation since 2000 amounts to less than 1 percent of its $40 million
budget.<BR><BR>Ms. Brookes said it was unlikely that researchers and analysts
at Heritage were even aware of the foundation's contributions. "Nobody here
would know that unless they walked upstairs and asked someone in development,"
she said. "It's just never discussed."<BR><BR>She said Heritage did not accept
money for specific research. "The money from the Walton Family Foundation has
always been earmarked for our general operations," she said. "They've never
given us any funds saying do this paper or that paper."<BR><BR>A spokeswoman
for the American Enterprise Institute said the group did not comment on its
donors. The group's focus on Wal-Mart has been notable. In June, the editor in
chief then of the group's magazine, The American Enterprise, wrote a long
essay defending Wal-Mart against critics. The editor, Karl Zinsmeister, now
the chief domestic policy adviser at the White House, said the campaign
against the company was "run by a clutch of political hacks."</DIV>
<DIV><BR>Conservative groups are not the only ones weighing in on the Wal-Mart
debate. Ms. Williams of Wal-Mart noted labor unions have financed
organizations that have been critical of Wal-Mart, like the Economic Policy
Institute, which received $2.5 million from unions in 2005.<BR><BR>In
response, Chris Kofinis, communications director for WakeUpWalmart.com, an arm
of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union that gives money to liberal
research groups, said: "While we openly support the mission of economic
justice, Wal-Mart and the Waltons put on a smiley face, hide the truth, all
while supporting right-wing causes who are paid to defend Wal-Mart's
exploitative practices."<BR><BR>The lack of a clear quid pro quo between
research groups and corporations like Wal-Mart makes the issue murky, said
Diana Aviv, chief executive of the Independent Sector, a trade organization
representing nonprofits and foundations. "I don't know how one proves what's
the chicken and what's the egg," she said.<BR><BR>Last year, the National
Committee for Responsive Philanthropy, a research and watchdog group,
published a report, "The Waltons and Wal-Mart: Self-Interested Philanthropy,"
that warned of the potential influence their vast wealth gives
them.<BR><BR>But Rick Cohen, executive director of the group, said he was more
concerned about the role the Walton foundation's money might play in shaping
public policy in areas like public education, where it has supported charter
schools and voucher systems.<BR><BR>"These are certainly not organizations
created and controlled by the corporation or the family and promoted as
somehow authentic when they aren't," Mr. Cohen said. "More important, I think,
is the disclosure of the funding in whatever's written, a sort of
disclaimer."</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>At 8:02 AM -0800 2/9/07, g. crabtree wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite="" type="cite"><B>With thanks to Tom Forbes @
Palousitics...</B></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite="" type="cite"> </BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite="" type="cite"><B>(CNSNews.com)</B> - Despite frequent and
vocal complaints from critics of the world's largest retail chain, Wal-Mart
"has arguably done more to help ordinary Americans, especially the poor and
disadvantaged, than any other institution in our society," according to the
authors of a new book being released nationally on Monday.<BR><BR>"Wal-Mart
does far more for America's working class than any labor union, bloated
federal bureaucracy or pandering politician," Richard Vedder, co-author of
"The Wal-Mart Revolution" and a visiting scholar at the conservative
American Enterprise Institute, told<B> Cybercast News Service</B> in a
telephone interview.<BR><BR>Because of this and other factors, "Wal-Mart is
saving America," added Vedder, who also serves as a distinguished professor
of economics at Ohio University.<BR><BR>"I know that sounds like an
exaggeration," he said, but "the economic transformation in U.S. retailing,
which is personified by Wal-Mart, has been good for both America and its
economy."<BR><BR>While admitting he was "an agnostic" regarding the retail
giant when he began more than a year of research and writing for the book,
the author argued that "Wal-Mart's basic business strategies have had a
profoundly positive impact on America's productivity, wages, consumer prices
and other key economic variables."<BR><BR>Vedder stressed that neither he
nor co-author Wendell Cox, a public-private partnerships expert, received
any kind of assistance from the retail chain, even when they contacted the
company seeking information for their book.<BR><BR>Nevertheless, their
research of financial and academic studies led Vedder and Cox to a number of
conclusions, they said:<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite="" type="cite">
<UL>
<LI><BR>
<LI>Wal-Mart workers are paid fairly - given their level of skills and
experience, and compared to other retail firms, Wal-Mart employees do
well;<BR>The chain's health-care coverage, retirement benefits and other
benefits are similar to those of other retail firms, and very few Wal-Mart
workers go without health insurance;
<LI>Big boxes mean big business, as communities with new Wal-Mart outlets
typically enjoy increased employment and incomes after the store opens;
<LI>Wal-Mart benefits the poor, in particular, in the form of lower prices
and new job opportunities; and
<LI>Attempts to keep Wal-Mart out of communities through zoning
restrictions, mandatory health insurance or special high minimum wages
hurt citizens, especially those with lower incomes</LI></UL></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite="" type="cite"><BR>Vedder acknowledged that Wal-Mart and
other big-box discount retailers such as Target or Home Depot have been
vilified as selfish retailers that mistreat their workers, outsource
American jobs, uproot communities and harm the poor.<BR><BR>"Nothing could
be further from the truth," he said.<BR><BR>"The criticism of Wal-Mart
follows a rich American tradition of attacking new retail innovations," the
author noted. "More than a century ago, some people were concerned that the
mail-order catalogs of Sears, Roebuck & Co. and Montgomery Ward were
destroying local retailing.<BR><BR>"In the 1930s, angry small grocery stores
attacked the new chains like A&P that brought lower prices and greater
choice to communities," Vedder said. "Congress even passed laws to try to
prevent stores from offering low prices to consumers, although those laws
were found legally flawed or ineffective."<BR><BR>He added that "the
anti-A&P campaign in the 1930s and the anti-Wal-Mart campaign 70 years
later are remarkably similar" since in both cases, "costly service providers
have lost out to more efficient companies that provide 'consumer welfare' to
their customers through low prices, greater choice selection and relatively
good service."<BR><BR><B>'Not an either-or proposition'</B><BR><BR>Chris
Kofinis, communications director for WakeUpWalMart.com, took a different
view of the conclusions drawn by the authors of "The Wal-Mart
Revolution."<BR><BR>"I challenge Vedder and Cox to walk a day in the shoes
of a Wal-Mart worker who struggles without affordable health care and gets
paid a poverty-level wage," Kofinis told<B> Cybercast News
Service</B>.<BR><BR>"I want them to walk a day in the shoes of a
manufacturing worker who had his job shipped overseas to China so they can
wax poetically about Wal-Mart's positive effects," he added.<BR><BR>"But the
truth is that Wal-Mart's negative effects far outweigh any benefits people
get from its 'everyday low prices,' and that's the tragedy here," Kofinis
said.<BR><BR>"This is not an either-or proposition. It never has been, never
will be and never needs to be," he said. "Wal-Mart can provide low prices
and be a responsible employer, but they don't want to. That's the
unfortunate part of all this.<BR><BR>"As long as companies like Wal-Mart
continue down this path of corporate irresponsibility, they are going to be
the focus of a growing political and social movement against them," Kofinis
noted. "It's really that simple."<BR><BR>Despite his praise for Wal-Mart,
Vedder readily agreed that the company "is far from perfect," as proven last
month, when the retail giant agreed to pay almost 87,000 employees <A
href="http://www.cnsnews.com/Nation/Archive/200701/NAT20070126c.htm">over
$33 million in back wages</A>.<BR><BR>So, given the complaints from
union-backed groups like WakeUpWalMart.com about the company, what should be
done about Wal-Mart? "Nothing," Vedder said. "Putting the government in the
position - for which it is ill-equipped - of picking winners and losers in a
market economy would be a disastrous policy."<BR><BR>Besides, he added,
Wal-Mart's influence may have peaked, since the company is starting to lose
market share to Internet retailers such as Amazon.com and
eBay.<BR><BR>"Change is progress," asserted Vedder.</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite="" type="cite"> </BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite="" type="cite"> </BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite="" type="cite"><FONT size=-1>g</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite="" type="cite"><B><BR></B>
<BLOCKQUOTE>----- Original Message -----</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><B>From:</B> <A href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com">Paul
Rumelhart</A></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><B>To:</B> <A href="mailto:jampot@adelphia.net">g.
crabtree</A></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><B>Cc:</B> <A
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><B>Sent:</B> Friday, February 09, 2007 7:32 AM</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] low wages?</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>g. crabtree wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite="" type="cite"><FONT size=-1>From a news story
thoughtfully posted by Mr. Solomon. It's unfortunate about Mr.
Woods difficulties but the article did point out one shining example of
the untruths that the local anti Wal-Mart wackadoo's continually
spout...</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>"Woods had trouble finding other work that paid as well as
his Wal-Mart job"</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><FONT size=-1>And this is in Lewiston. A town with twice the
employment opportunities that Moscow currently (and for the foreseeable
future should our illustrious city council have its way) has. Sort of
shoots the theory that Wal- Mart comes to town and only provides crappy,
low wage jobs, that nobody in their right mind would want wouldn't you
say?</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><FONT size=-1>g</FONT><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Let's see. Racial harrassment, sexual harrassment,
glass ceilings for female workers, inadequate health care benefits, and
unpaid overtime. I can see why "crappy, low wage jobs, that nobody
in their right mind would want" pretty much sums it up. And that's
just the items I've heard about in the news lately.<BR><BR>I can't just
look past all that because they happen to employ people. I think
standards are a positive thing, and that more employees should set theirs
higher.<BR><BR>I'm sure Mr. Woods was happy at some level to have a paying
job, but going through two years of that kind of harrassment is too high a
price to have to pay. I wonder if they fired the
manager.<BR><BR>Paul</BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>