I'm trying to imagine what sort of politcal situation we'd be in if Hillary had won, she had fired Comey while he was in the middle of another email investgation, and had then done a televised interview in which she had ADMITTED to firing him to end the investigation. But all that appears before my eyes is visions of someone burning at the stake. If this scenario had taken place, she would have been impeached 6 months ago. And everyone knows that. But I digress.....
Exactly why neither one of these idiots should have been our candidates to begin with. I'm starting to think maybe we should just have a big lottery of all legal voters and the winner (loser?) becomes president. Some homeless dude from New Orleans might even do a better job...
At least that homeless guy wouldn't be stacking the government with climate change deniers and billionaires. I imagine the homeless guy would not be so greedy as a 1.5 trillion dollar tax cut for the rich. Maybe he'd be happy with a hundred bucks.
Well if nothing else the Trump presidency has shown that there are no barriers to public office.
It's been shown that its OK if: -You can't read good -Are very emotional and needy -Have no experience -It's ok to flip flop around on issues -There's no such thing as a conflict of interest -Friends and family will be welcome in your administration
Criminal past? No worries, Republicans are putting forward four convicted criminals for Congress - Joe Arpaio (criminal contempt) , Michael Grimm (felony tax evasion), Donald Blankenship (conspiracy to evade mining safety laws after 29 miners died) and Greg Gianforte (assaulting a reporter).
Maybe the only sticking point is religion. But if you can just pay lip service to being religious and patriotic you are good.
Anyway long story short, there are no barriers to political office.
I'd point out that these aren't people who are already in office accused of a crime. These are situations where the crime is already well-known before the voting takes place. By the way, Gianforte is not the only thug in regards to reporters from that group. Besides his tax evasion, Michael Grimm, when confronted about said tax evasion, once threatened to throw a reporter off a balcony (that they were standing on at the time). I didn't even know that evil bastard Blankenship was running. That guy should have been in prison for the rest of his life. In my book, he is a mass murderer.
ANOTHER round of layoffs at the now infamous Carrier Plant that Trump claimed to have saved during the campaign. Since Trump's media stunt, the plant has lost 33% of it's entire workforce:
ANOTHER round of layoffs at the now infamous Carrier Plant that Trump claimed to have saved during the campaign. Since Trump's media stunt, the plant has lost 33% of it's entire workforce:
I’m sure Carrier has refused all of the tax incentives they were given in exchange for saving these jobs since they did not, in fact, save them. Despicable.
So, now we have Wal-Mart entering this "we're giving a $1000 bonus club" (I find it exceedingly odd and suspicious that all these companies are all using the EXACT same number). But if you read beyond the deliberately misleading headline you'll see that Wal-Mart isn't likely to be paying out many of these at all. You'll be reading everywhere today Wal-Mat is giving out $1000 bonuses, but here is the truth:
So yeah, if you have somehow managed to toil away at Wal-Mart for 2 DECADES, they are giving out $1000 bonus. My guess would be that percentage of employees is incredibly low. Moreover, Wal-Mart has incredibly high turnover (for obvious reasons if you've ever been in one). Wal-Mart of course knows that a vast swath of their employees will never approach the 2 year mark where ANY bonus kicks in. Beyond that, they say they are raising their wage from $10 to $11. Everything I know about Wal-Mart tells me they will do what they always do. They'll cut full-time employees hours to the bare minimum (32) and continue to make sure no part-time employees qualify for benefits of any kind. Which, of course will ensure most people quit long before any bonus situation enters the picture. Another dog and pony show once you get past the press release and headline. These companies have been able to afford this stuff for YEARS and held their employees hostage til they go their ransom. Again, I point to the Carrier plant. Do not make the mistake of judging these corporations in the moment they are looking for good press. Wait a couple weeks, or months. Then you'll see their true colors. It has been happening over and over.
Ummm, so what I said about giving it a couple weeks?? Turns out I have to admit I was way wrong on this. I apologize. It was a couple of HOURS before this hit:
As you'll see in the article, we are talking about the abrupt closing of 63 stores. Employees in some cases weren't even notified. As someone who has had that happen to them, you can't overstate how much it screws with your life. Even I can't believe how nakedly transparent this morning's announcement was given this news.
It seems like a lot of companies are giving out the one time bonus and at the same time closing plants or laying off people. Maybe they figure they will get good and bad publicity which will cancel each other out and in the end they will do whatever they want anyway.
It seems like a lot of companies are giving out the one time bonus and at the same time closing plants or laying off people. Maybe they figure they will get good and bad publicity which will cancel each other out and in the end they will do whatever they want anyway.
Almost to a company that is what is happening. A big media reach-around for some bonus, and then hundreds (likely thousands in this Wal-Mart incident) out of a job entirely. Wal-Mart in particular seems almost diabolical in how this was orchestrated.
Imagine being an employee of one of these Sam's Club locations. You wake up this morning with an alert on your phone about a raise and a bonus. You drive to work and.....the doors are locked. Your store has been shut down. You have about $500 left in your checking account. You'll get one more check, but since it's the middle of the pay period, it will only be about $300. Your kid needs new shoes. You haven't done your grocery shopping yet. In two weeks rent is due. Anxiety sets in. And that is just what goes through your head in the first 30 seconds of realization that your job was ripped out from under you by people who just got a multi-BILLION dollar tax cut.
It seems like a lot of companies are giving out the one time bonus and at the same time closing plants or laying off people. Maybe they figure they will get good and bad publicity which will cancel each other out and in the end they will do whatever they want anyway.
Almost to a company that is what is happening. A big media reach-around for some bonus, and then hundreds (likely thousands in this Wal-Mart incident) out of a job entirely. Wal-Mart in particular seems almost diabolical in how this was orchestrated.
Imagine being an employee of one of these Sam's Club locations. You wake up this morning with an alert on your phone about a raise and a bonus. You drive to work and.....the doors are locked. Your store has been shut down. You have about $500 left in your checking account. You'll get one more check, but since it's the middle of the pay period, it will only be about $300. Your kid needs new shoes. You haven't done your grocery shopping yet. In two weeks rent is due. Anxiety sets in. And that is just what goes through your head in the first 30 seconds of realization that your job was ripped out from under you by people who just got a multi-BILLION dollar tax cut.
Then they go home and watch Fox News and it tells them the problem is illegal immigrants taking their jobs, Muslims implementing sharia law and North Korea is rilly rilly scary!
It seems like a lot of companies are giving out the one time bonus and at the same time closing plants or laying off people. Maybe they figure they will get good and bad publicity which will cancel each other out and in the end they will do whatever they want anyway.
Almost to a company that is what is happening. A big media reach-around for some bonus, and then hundreds (likely thousands in this Wal-Mart incident) out of a job entirely. Wal-Mart in particular seems almost diabolical in how this was orchestrated.
Imagine being an employee of one of these Sam's Club locations. You wake up this morning with an alert on your phone about a raise and a bonus. You drive to work and.....the doors are locked. Your store has been shut down. You have about $500 left in your checking account. You'll get one more check, but since it's the middle of the pay period, it will only be about $300. Your kid needs new shoes. You haven't done your grocery shopping yet. In two weeks rent is due. Anxiety sets in. And that is just what goes through your head in the first 30 seconds of realization that your job was ripped out from under you by people who just got a multi-BILLION dollar tax cut.
Then they go home and watch Fox News and it tells them the problem is illegal immigrants taking their jobs, Muslims implementing sharia law and North Korea is rilly rilly scary!
I'm not so sure that will work when it's this blatant. There is a piece in the New Yorker today about how pissed off these Carrier workers are. They feel genuinely betrayed:
@jjstraka34 Of course they are angry, but the rest of his base will not blame Trump for sure.
EDIT: Nor should anyone really, but he and his government should be held accountable.
What Trump (and Pence, who is just as guilty) did with that Carrier plant was not your run-of-the-mill campaign promise. He went to a place where hundreds of people were desperate at the prospect of losing their job and promised them he was personally going to save them. Mike Pence gave tax incentives to the company in his position as the Gov. of Indiana to supposedly make this happen. They tied themselves to the fate of that plant. These people did not know that all that had been done was a 6-month stay of execution, to usher in a government that would make it's #1 mission to give the company even MORE tax cuts, while a 1/3rd of them have lost their livelihood. It's really repulsive.
What happend to this??: "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me. I lift my lamp beside the golden door"
I don't know what else there is to say about the issue of whether or not Trump is a racist. He said this in a bipartisan meeting of lawmakers. And, for the record, why would Norwegians want to immigrate to the United States in 2018?? They have a wonderful, self-sustaining democracy of their own. So they can lose their healthcare??
As I have said on many occasions, no one has a lower opinion of Trump supporters than the people in the White House. No one. If they are wrong, what unbelievable contempt for your own voters. And if they are right.....well, then Hillary's comment about "deplorables" almost seems like white-glove treatment.
Ummm, so what I said about giving it a couple weeks?? Turns out I have to admit I was way wrong on this. I apologize. It was a couple of HOURS before this hit:
As you'll see in the article, we are talking about the abrupt closing of 63 stores. Employees in some cases weren't even notified. As someone who has had that happen to them, you can't overstate how much it screws with your life. Even I can't believe how nakedly transparent this morning's announcement was given this news.
Keep in mind I already said, don't shop at Walmart. Any business that allows a worker to be trampled to death does not deserve your money. I just want to speak generically here.
Yes this is bad optics and really, I personally would have held off the bonus announcement for about a month and just led with the negative news of Walmart having to close 63 stores but it also sounds like the left hand didn't know what the right hand was doing. While the main company was announcing the increased benefits and pay raise, the sub company was taking stock and realizing that the business model that they had put forth was not working and had to take action.
And that is the deal. If these 63 locations were bleeding money, or not hitting their required goals, it doesn't matter how much money the parent company takes in. They shouldn't have to dole out money to something that was and continued to be a failure. The company needed to cut their losses and recoup as much assets as possible.
I will also say, it isn't good business practise to tell an employee that their place of work is closing down from a security stand point. I personally been a part of 4 work place closures/mass terminations and in all 4 cases, I was never told prior till the day I went into work.
Now here is the deal. In Ontario, if a company terminates your employment without cause, they either have to give you a set notice, or pay you your salary for the weeks you were not notified. (One shit employer (on the advice of their lawyer) fired us all 1 week before we hit the one year mark so they'd only have to pay us a week's salary. The store was still open too. We were all terminated over an ownership dispute. THAT is something to be pissed about.)
So if I was terminated tomorrow without cause, I would have 2 months pay (+benefits for those 2 months) to help me with bills while I attempt to find other employment. I can still go buy the groceries and pay the rent. I would have always bought. If my kid was about to get an eye exam or a dental appointment, that'd still be covered (and if they weren't, I'd be booking an appointment ASAP... if I had a kid). I might feel bad for the people who were hired for Christmas, but their employment wasn't guaranteed past the first of January anyway. I'd still be anxious about finding another job, but worrying about money would not be an issue... until the third month, but EI would kick in.
This is Ontario Law. It's the government's responsibility to make sure businesses and corporations are taking care of their constituents when doing business in their jurisdiction. Do not blame companies for taking advantage of lax laws. Blame the politicians who are suppose to be representing YOU.
If YOU are offended by what Walmart has done here, contact your State representative and ask for better employee rights and laws. If you personally do not know what your rights are, start researching them and make sure they are to your standards. If they are not, contact your state government and demand it, especially if there are elections coming up. Make it a priority for you and your neighbours.
Walmart made a tough decision, and trust me it was tough. You may think the suits above have no hearts and only think of profits but you'd be wrong. The people who made this call had a shitty day, and probably had a shitty month knowing they had to make this call. It was a business decision to keep their brand strong and competitive. That doesn't mean they're not a shit company, they're still that, but this decision alone doesn't make them one.
The politicians who've let these workers down on the other hand...
Now put that in perspective with Carrier. Instead of giving the company tax cuts to keep employment, would it not have been more beneficial to the workers to know that if they lost their jobs without notice, they'd have the right to be covered for a set amount of weeks? Is that anywhere in this document? This is what they should be angry about. Carrier is operating under the laws of N.C. If they're bleeding money and can't stay competitive in their field you can not fault them for attempting to make moves to keep them competitive. It's shitty, it hurts but its the truth.
What I'd say is that when the promises of a massive corporate tax cut are that it is going to create jobs, and when in almost every instance where companies announced bonuses or raises it was ALSO then revealed that they were engaging in massive layoffs, my original opposition to such a tax cut becomes permanently hardened in stone.
Because, to be perfectly honest, when I initially saw the bonuses being handed out by companies like AT&T, Well Fargo and Wal-Mart, I thought to myself "shit, this is gonna be pretty tough to argue from a liberal stand-point". Especially in regards to short-term optics. Even the Carrier plant in Indiana, of course, was good optics for Trump. But in ALL of these cases, it turned out to be nothing but a hustle. Today, as I mentioned, I could not believe when I looked at my phone at lunch and saw that Wal-Mart had shuttered 63 stores on the same day they had announced the "benefits" their tax bill had provided for their workers. I was at least expecting the con-job to play out over 2 or 3 weeks, not 4 hours. AT&T has had massive layoffs. Comcast has jacked up the price of every one of their services. Pfizer has had massive layoffs AND is stopping research for drugs used to treat horrible diseases. Wal-Mart just told a couple thousand people today to go f**k themselves. And of course, the Carrier plant is the symbol of all of this, losing a full 1/3rd of it's workforce. These are all examples from the last 14 days. At a certain point, a trend starts to form. If these astronomically massive tax cuts that were just given to corporate America aren't going to be used to save jobs, give consumers lower costs, or be used for research and development (which is absolutely how it was sold to the public, even though the public didn't buy it), then what the hell is the justification, other than a money-funnel that is going directly to executives and rich shareholders??
What I'd say is that when the promises of a massive corporate tax cut are that it is going to create jobs, and when in almost every instance where companies announced bonuses or raises it was ALSO then revealed that they were engaging in massive layoffs, my original opposition to such a tax cut becomes permanently hardened in stone.
Can you point to any company that said this would happen or was it all political talk?
Such as did AT&T state prior to receiving the tax cut that this was needed to create X amount of jobs? If you found any company or non Republican backer (nonpartisan think tank for example) stating this then I'd might be mad too.
If the answer is no though, you can not blame them for this tax cut. If I'd give you a million dollars right now, you wouldn't say no.
You need to blame the politicians for pushing this through not anyone who benefited from it. They're the ones who spun it that way, and if you believed the spin, then hopefully you'll know the next time one of these people open their mouth not to trust a damn thing that comes out.
Walmart, I will give a slight bit of kudos to, because they are the only ones that announced that they are raising their starting wage to $11 an hour and not just a flat one time bonus. That does help employees. The "potential additional investments" also sounds intriguing, but this is also a company that needed good PR when it came to their worker rights for awhile. This was an opportunity to highlight it and hide it from all their other deplorable practises.
What I'd say is that when the promises of a massive corporate tax cut are that it is going to create jobs, and when in almost every instance where companies announced bonuses or raises it was ALSO then revealed that they were engaging in massive layoffs, my original opposition to such a tax cut becomes permanently hardened in stone.
Can you point to any company that said this would happen or was it all political talk?
Such as did AT&T state prior to receiving the tax cut that this was needed to create X amount of jobs? If you found any company or non Republican backer (nonpartisan think tank for example) stating this then I'd might be mad too.
If the answer is no though, you can not blame them for this tax cut. If I'd give you a million dollars right now, you wouldn't say no.
You need to blame the politicians for pushing this through not anyone who benefited from it. They're the ones who spun it that way, and if you believed the spin, then hopefully you'll know the next time one of these people open their mouth not to trust a damn thing that comes out.
Walmart, I will give a slight bit of kudos to, because they are the only ones that announced that they are raising their starting wage to $11 an hour and not just a flat one time bonus. That does help employees. The "potential additional investments" also sounds intriguing, but this is also a company that needed good PR when it came to their worker rights for awhile. This was an opportunity to highlight it and hide it from all their other deplorable practises.
Of course I didn't believe it, and I do blame the politicians. And then when the companies specifically REFER to the tax cut as the reason for bonuses, and then attempt to engage in stealth lay-offs (that obviously don't get their own press release pushed from no less a place of power than the White House Press Room) then I will hold them equally accountable, because they were more than willing to hitch their wagons to it. All of the companies I mentioned specifically referred to the tax cuts as the reason for bonuses or wage increases. There is no way in hell I'm playing a game where they are allowed to credit such a tax cut for one-time, paltry handouts that will amount to crumbs over the long-term, and lay people off at the same time. If they expect to receive kudos for one, and then be able to pass the later off as "just business", I mean....sorry. I just can't let that slide. These corporations tied themselves to this tax cut with their press releases about the bonuses. Thus, I will blame them and the tax-cuts for the layoffs as well. I will blame the tax-cuts for increased prices from telcom companies. They made the rules. I didn't write their press releases bragging about their $1000 bonuses. Well, now every business decision they make can (very reasonably) be used to argue for or against their tax cut, and their general competence as a company. If they hadn't have been so eager to shill for the Administration in return for handing them billions of dollars, my argument would be alot harder to make. But they did. And if they want to play that game, everyone else can play it too.
I'm being perfectly serious about my initial reaction to every one of these bonuses I saw. I had a brief moment where I actually wondered if every bit of historical evidence and experience I knew about trickle-down economics was wrong. Yet somehow, they ALL managed to shoot that notion to shit within weeks, days or hours. It's the kind of thing that honestly makes you unable to take anything they ever say at face value again, or indeed even BELIEVE they are actually going to even follow through with the positive steps they claim to be taking. And of course, as I said, the shuttering of 63 Sam's Club stores today was the absolute last straw for me. If they are doing that, treating their employees with such contempt and disrespect, then I can't help but ask "what else are they willing to do the re-coup the money from their publicity stunt this morning??" God knows, I'm sure we'll find out really soon.
Nah, as I said prior a one time Christmas Bonus isn't trickle down, it is usually expected. I could have told you all those announcements were made politically. Without diving into researching all the companies I bet republicans had a hand into crafting the message that was sent out. It was definitely the case in Sinclair's case.
Walmart can still get a pass from me though about hitching their pay raise to the tax cut. It is the only example of trickle down that has stuck so far as it isn't a one time payout. But once again I believe they did this so news stories wouldn't highlight how deplorable they have been to workers in the past and just highlight the positives from the announcement. It is still smoke and mirrors, but in a different way.
Nah, as I said prior a one time Christmas Bonus isn't trickle down, it is usually expected. I could have told you all those announcements were made politically. Without diving into researching all the companies I bet republicans had a hand into crafting the message that was sent out. It was definitely the case in Sinclair's case.
Walmart can still get a pass from me though about hitching their pay raise to the tax cut. It is the only example of trickle down that has stuck so far as it isn't a one time payout. But once again I believe they did this so news stories wouldn't highlight how deplorable they have been to workers in the past and just highlight the positives from the announcement. It is still smoke and mirrors, but in a different way.
Well, that's another issue. I don't even believe most of these bonuses had anything to do with the cuts at all. And I also highly suspect that Wal-Mart already had plans to move their wage to $11/hr because their main competitor in most of the US, Target, had already done so. I doubt they had much choice if they didn't want their high turnover rate to be even WORSE than it already is. I still suspect if someone investigates this in a year that Wal-Mart will have found a fairly blatant and obvious way to mitigate this wage increase. I am 100% sure that for everyone that benefits from the wage increase, someone else is going to suffer (starting with god only knows how many Sam's Club employees looking for a job today). They simply have a track record that inspires no confidence in any other outcome.
As for the bonuses, as I mentioned, most people aren't even going to see them. As to the $1000 ones, anyone working at Wal-Mart for 20+ years is probably not still stocking shelves or running the cash register, and is likely already in a high-paying position as a manager or in a corporate office. The intent of the announcement was of course to make it seem like the person you see at the deli putting your potato salad in a container is going to be getting a $1000 check, and in 99.9% of the cases, that simply isn't going to be true.
The intent of the announcement was of course to make it seem like the person you see at the deli putting your potato salad in a container is going to be getting a $1000 check, and in 99.9% of the cases, that simply isn't going to be true.
They could give the CEO a one million dollar raise and the workers a $0 raise and say on average our employees got a one thousand dollar bonus! I doubt the numbers match up for Walmart but you can see my point...
What I'd say is that when the promises of a massive corporate tax cut are that it is going to create jobs, and when in almost every instance where companies announced bonuses or raises it was ALSO then revealed that they were engaging in massive layoffs, my original opposition to such a tax cut becomes permanently hardened in stone.
I think I'm with @deltago on this point. A strictly commercial company will not keep a loss-making business going, with no prospect of that changing, irrespective of how much money they are making in other businesses. The fact that taxes are reduced makes no difference to this. The only potential way in which jobs might be saved is, if a company has slightly more cash reserves as a result of lower taxes, they would potentially be willing to invest more to turn round the profitability of a business (but if there is no prospect of it becoming profitable, they obviously wouldn't invest anyway).
Not all businesses are strictly commercial of course. Some have charitable aims and significant numbers have public service obligations. As example of the latter would be formerly publicly-owned utilities like water companies. Legislation will require them to continue to supply water even in locations where they're losing money doing so.
When politicians say that reducing taxes will save jobs, what they really mean is that reducing taxes allows more investment to create jobs. As mentioned above it is possible that investment will save existing jobs, but it's much more likely that it will create new ones instead. That may still give opportunities for existing staff (through relocation, re-training etc), but in most cases you will see a switch between old and new staff. The fact that new jobs become available may well be of little or no comfort to those losing their jobs, but would be a big factor across the economy as a whole.
The above all assumes a particular economic model where tax cuts does generate more investment. Personally I don't think there's much truth in that argument (at least at the tax rates now applying in the US). I suspect that in most cases, if there is a good business opportunity, funding can be found for it (through borrowing, share issues, venture capital etc). If there is not a good business opportunity then the cash resources in the company will just be held or distributed back to shareholders. Whether or not you believe that tax cuts will have a major impact on investment though, they will never have a major impact on saving existing jobs.
And he is also out in full-force this morning with the "Democrats want to shut down the government" nonsense, which, of course, they can't do. But the real question is this: why would Democrats, after yesterday, even sit in a room and pretend to negotiate an immigration deal with a man who is an overt racist?? Because he is. And it needs to stop being tip-toed around. Donald Trump is what every so-called hysterical liberal said he was from the beginning. And, again, his racism is a feature, not a bug. Negotiate?? No, he needs to be marginalized and checked by the States and courts until he can be defeated for good.
Supposedly, conservatives are pushing for what they call "merit-based" immigration. But what Trump said yesterday was not that he wanted more doctors and engineers (many of whom do come from "shithole" countries). He said he wanted people from Norway. Being from Norway is not a job skill. And even if you are skeptical of his racism, once you wrap your head around what I just said, you'll find that, yes, he is.
Botswana summoned the U.S. embassy to clarify if it is one of the "shit-hole" countries Trump referenced.
I can't even really fathom what most of the rest of the globe thinks of us right now. I would be embarrassed to travel outside the country and reveal where I'm from. For the record (and this is from a GOP pollster):
Comments
It's been shown that its OK if:
-You can't read good
-Are very emotional and needy
-Have no experience
-It's ok to flip flop around on issues
-There's no such thing as a conflict of interest
-Friends and family will be welcome in your administration
Criminal past? No worries, Republicans are putting forward four convicted criminals for Congress - Joe Arpaio (criminal contempt) , Michael Grimm (felony tax evasion), Donald Blankenship (conspiracy to evade mining safety laws after 29 miners died) and Greg Gianforte (assaulting a reporter).
Maybe the only sticking point is religion. But if you can just pay lip service to being religious and patriotic you are good.
Anyway long story short, there are no barriers to political office.
http://fox59.com/2018/01/10/new-layoffs-at-carrier-factory-year-after-trump-deal/
2-4 years: $250
5-9 years: $300
10-14 years: $400
15-19 years: $750
20+ years: $1000
So yeah, if you have somehow managed to toil away at Wal-Mart for 2 DECADES, they are giving out $1000 bonus. My guess would be that percentage of employees is incredibly low. Moreover, Wal-Mart has incredibly high turnover (for obvious reasons if you've ever been in one). Wal-Mart of course knows that a vast swath of their employees will never approach the 2 year mark where ANY bonus kicks in. Beyond that, they say they are raising their wage from $10 to $11. Everything I know about Wal-Mart tells me they will do what they always do. They'll cut full-time employees hours to the bare minimum (32) and continue to make sure no part-time employees qualify for benefits of any kind. Which, of course will ensure most people quit long before any bonus situation enters the picture. Another dog and pony show once you get past the press release and headline. These companies have been able to afford this stuff for YEARS and held their employees hostage til they go their ransom. Again, I point to the Carrier plant. Do not make the mistake of judging these corporations in the moment they are looking for good press. Wait a couple weeks, or months. Then you'll see their true colors. It has been happening over and over.
http://www.businessinsider.com/walmart-suddenly-closes-sams-club-stores-2018-1
As you'll see in the article, we are talking about the abrupt closing of 63 stores. Employees in some cases weren't even notified. As someone who has had that happen to them, you can't overstate how much it screws with your life. Even I can't believe how nakedly transparent this morning's announcement was given this news.
Imagine being an employee of one of these Sam's Club locations. You wake up this morning with an alert on your phone about a raise and a bonus. You drive to work and.....the doors are locked. Your store has been shut down. You have about $500 left in your checking account. You'll get one more check, but since it's the middle of the pay period, it will only be about $300. Your kid needs new shoes. You haven't done your grocery shopping yet. In two weeks rent is due. Anxiety sets in. And that is just what goes through your head in the first 30 seconds of realization that your job was ripped out from under you by people who just got a multi-BILLION dollar tax cut.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/carrier-employees-soon-to-be-laid-off-feel-betrayed-by-donald-trump
EDIT: Nor should anyone really, but he and his government should be held accountable.
Speaking of repulsive, my god:
What happend to this??:
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me.
I lift my lamp beside the golden door"
I don't know what else there is to say about the issue of whether or not Trump is a racist. He said this in a bipartisan meeting of lawmakers. And, for the record, why would Norwegians want to immigrate to the United States in 2018?? They have a wonderful, self-sustaining democracy of their own. So they can lose their healthcare??
And then there is this:
As I have said on many occasions, no one has a lower opinion of Trump supporters than the people in the White House. No one. If they are wrong, what unbelievable contempt for your own voters. And if they are right.....well, then Hillary's comment about "deplorables" almost seems like white-glove treatment.
Yes this is bad optics and really, I personally would have held off the bonus announcement for about a month and just led with the negative news of Walmart having to close 63 stores but it also sounds like the left hand didn't know what the right hand was doing. While the main company was announcing the increased benefits and pay raise, the sub company was taking stock and realizing that the business model that they had put forth was not working and had to take action.
And that is the deal. If these 63 locations were bleeding money, or not hitting their required goals, it doesn't matter how much money the parent company takes in. They shouldn't have to dole out money to something that was and continued to be a failure. The company needed to cut their losses and recoup as much assets as possible.
I will also say, it isn't good business practise to tell an employee that their place of work is closing down from a security stand point. I personally been a part of 4 work place closures/mass terminations and in all 4 cases, I was never told prior till the day I went into work.
Now here is the deal. In Ontario, if a company terminates your employment without cause, they either have to give you a set notice, or pay you your salary for the weeks you were not notified. (One shit employer (on the advice of their lawyer) fired us all 1 week before we hit the one year mark so they'd only have to pay us a week's salary. The store was still open too. We were all terminated over an ownership dispute. THAT is something to be pissed about.)
So if I was terminated tomorrow without cause, I would have 2 months pay (+benefits for those 2 months) to help me with bills while I attempt to find other employment. I can still go buy the groceries and pay the rent. I would have always bought. If my kid was about to get an eye exam or a dental appointment, that'd still be covered (and if they weren't, I'd be booking an appointment ASAP... if I had a kid). I might feel bad for the people who were hired for Christmas, but their employment wasn't guaranteed past the first of January anyway. I'd still be anxious about finding another job, but worrying about money would not be an issue... until the third month, but EI would kick in.
This is Ontario Law. It's the government's responsibility to make sure businesses and corporations are taking care of their constituents when doing business in their jurisdiction. Do not blame companies for taking advantage of lax laws. Blame the politicians who are suppose to be representing YOU.
If YOU are offended by what Walmart has done here, contact your State representative and ask for better employee rights and laws. If you personally do not know what your rights are, start researching them and make sure they are to your standards. If they are not, contact your state government and demand it, especially if there are elections coming up. Make it a priority for you and your neighbours.
Walmart made a tough decision, and trust me it was tough. You may think the suits above have no hearts and only think of profits but you'd be wrong. The people who made this call had a shitty day, and probably had a shitty month knowing they had to make this call. It was a business decision to keep their brand strong and competitive. That doesn't mean they're not a shit company, they're still that, but this decision alone doesn't make them one.
The politicians who've let these workers down on the other hand...
Now put that in perspective with Carrier. Instead of giving the company tax cuts to keep employment, would it not have been more beneficial to the workers to know that if they lost their jobs without notice, they'd have the right to be covered for a set amount of weeks? Is that anywhere in this document? This is what they should be angry about. Carrier is operating under the laws of N.C. If they're bleeding money and can't stay competitive in their field you can not fault them for attempting to make moves to keep them competitive. It's shitty, it hurts but its the truth.
Because, to be perfectly honest, when I initially saw the bonuses being handed out by companies like AT&T, Well Fargo and Wal-Mart, I thought to myself "shit, this is gonna be pretty tough to argue from a liberal stand-point". Especially in regards to short-term optics. Even the Carrier plant in Indiana, of course, was good optics for Trump. But in ALL of these cases, it turned out to be nothing but a hustle. Today, as I mentioned, I could not believe when I looked at my phone at lunch and saw that Wal-Mart had shuttered 63 stores on the same day they had announced the "benefits" their tax bill had provided for their workers. I was at least expecting the con-job to play out over 2 or 3 weeks, not 4 hours. AT&T has had massive layoffs. Comcast has jacked up the price of every one of their services. Pfizer has had massive layoffs AND is stopping research for drugs used to treat horrible diseases. Wal-Mart just told a couple thousand people today to go f**k themselves. And of course, the Carrier plant is the symbol of all of this, losing a full 1/3rd of it's workforce. These are all examples from the last 14 days. At a certain point, a trend starts to form. If these astronomically massive tax cuts that were just given to corporate America aren't going to be used to save jobs, give consumers lower costs, or be used for research and development (which is absolutely how it was sold to the public, even though the public didn't buy it), then what the hell is the justification, other than a money-funnel that is going directly to executives and rich shareholders??
Such as did AT&T state prior to receiving the tax cut that this was needed to create X amount of jobs? If you found any company or non Republican backer (nonpartisan think tank for example) stating this then I'd might be mad too.
If the answer is no though, you can not blame them for this tax cut. If I'd give you a million dollars right now, you wouldn't say no.
You need to blame the politicians for pushing this through not anyone who benefited from it. They're the ones who spun it that way, and if you believed the spin, then hopefully you'll know the next time one of these people open their mouth not to trust a damn thing that comes out.
Walmart, I will give a slight bit of kudos to, because they are the only ones that announced that they are raising their starting wage to $11 an hour and not just a flat one time bonus. That does help employees. The "potential additional investments" also sounds intriguing, but this is also a company that needed good PR when it came to their worker rights for awhile. This was an opportunity to highlight it and hide it from all their other deplorable practises.
I'm being perfectly serious about my initial reaction to every one of these bonuses I saw. I had a brief moment where I actually wondered if every bit of historical evidence and experience I knew about trickle-down economics was wrong. Yet somehow, they ALL managed to shoot that notion to shit within weeks, days or hours. It's the kind of thing that honestly makes you unable to take anything they ever say at face value again, or indeed even BELIEVE they are actually going to even follow through with the positive steps they claim to be taking. And of course, as I said, the shuttering of 63 Sam's Club stores today was the absolute last straw for me. If they are doing that, treating their employees with such contempt and disrespect, then I can't help but ask "what else are they willing to do the re-coup the money from their publicity stunt this morning??" God knows, I'm sure we'll find out really soon.
Walmart can still get a pass from me though about hitching their pay raise to the tax cut. It is the only example of trickle down that has stuck so far as it isn't a one time payout. But once again I believe they did this so news stories wouldn't highlight how deplorable they have been to workers in the past and just highlight the positives from the announcement. It is still smoke and mirrors, but in a different way.
As for the bonuses, as I mentioned, most people aren't even going to see them. As to the $1000 ones, anyone working at Wal-Mart for 20+ years is probably not still stocking shelves or running the cash register, and is likely already in a high-paying position as a manager or in a corporate office. The intent of the announcement was of course to make it seem like the person you see at the deli putting your potato salad in a container is going to be getting a $1000 check, and in 99.9% of the cases, that simply isn't going to be true.
That's pretty much what's going on here.
Not all businesses are strictly commercial of course. Some have charitable aims and significant numbers have public service obligations. As example of the latter would be formerly publicly-owned utilities like water companies. Legislation will require them to continue to supply water even in locations where they're losing money doing so.
When politicians say that reducing taxes will save jobs, what they really mean is that reducing taxes allows more investment to create jobs. As mentioned above it is possible that investment will save existing jobs, but it's much more likely that it will create new ones instead. That may still give opportunities for existing staff (through relocation, re-training etc), but in most cases you will see a switch between old and new staff. The fact that new jobs become available may well be of little or no comfort to those losing their jobs, but would be a big factor across the economy as a whole.
The above all assumes a particular economic model where tax cuts does generate more investment. Personally I don't think there's much truth in that argument (at least at the tax rates now applying in the US). I suspect that in most cases, if there is a good business opportunity, funding can be found for it (through borrowing, share issues, venture capital etc). If there is not a good business opportunity then the cash resources in the company will just be held or distributed back to shareholders. Whether or not you believe that tax cuts will have a major impact on investment though, they will never have a major impact on saving existing jobs.
Supposedly, conservatives are pushing for what they call "merit-based" immigration. But what Trump said yesterday was not that he wanted more doctors and engineers (many of whom do come from "shithole" countries). He said he wanted people from Norway. Being from Norway is not a job skill. And even if you are skeptical of his racism, once you wrap your head around what I just said, you'll find that, yes, he is.