<!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 6.00.2800.1515" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I have read so many articles about this and too
many people are ignoring what it really means. The unions are unhappy they are
not in control of something so big. It is outrageous that so many cannot see the
truth of this. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>And now here it comes! All those who will not look
into the whole story to 'inform' me of where I am wrong. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Its not the NYT here folks it is the Wall Street
Journal. You will find many more of this info in economics magazines and by
listening to economist on the radio. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>But, if you wish to carry on...have at it.
</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
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=jampot@adelphia.net href="mailto:jampot@adelphia.net">g. crabtree</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=godshatter@yahoo.com
href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com">Paul Rumelhart</A> ; <A
title=msolomon@moscow.com href="mailto:msolomon@moscow.com">Mark Solomon</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 2:02
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] low
wages?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<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>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>=======================================================<BR> List
services made available by First Step Internet, <BR> serving the
communities of the Palouse since 1994.
<BR>
http://www.fsr.net
<BR>
mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com<BR>=======================================================</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>