abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
I bet that same 1 third correlates with either Walmart's employees or it's customers.
22 Facts That Prove That The Bottom 90 Percent Of America Is Systematically Getting P
- Thread starter squarepush3r
- Start date
I bet that same 1 third correlates with either Walmart's employees or it's customers.
Wal-Mart saves consumers tens of billions of dollars a year.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Chinese goods are cheap.
Yes, they are. The average American family saves thousands of dollars a year because Wal-Mart exists.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
The average American worker is employed by Wal-mart.
The average worker makes far better than Walmart pay, but it was a nice try.
Not really, most of the stuff at wal-mart is just consumer JUNK that breaks soon or gets put out in the garage in a box somewhere forgotten about until it gets tossed in a yard sale or the landfill.
The last TV I got at Wal Mart lasted 2 years.
I still have my Old RCA TV from 1969, it still works. I don't use it.
I have a Zenith radio with vacuum tubes I use every day, its 70 years old.
I bought a Seat Cover for my truck from Wal Mart last year, it needs to be replaced because apparently the sun turns it into paper and it basically disintegrated.
I bought a digital camera from Wal Mart 2 years ago, it lasted 3 months.
Cheap shit that breaks right away is just a waste of money, not a saver of money.
I bought a Toyota Land Cruiser FJ60 30 years ago this July, still have it , still 100% original, still using the same fan belts. The only thing I have had to replace because it broke was a headlight. Otherwise 100% like it came from the factory except for accessories and tires, 120,000 miles, should be able to get another 200,000 before the first engine rebuild, should be good for 3 rebuilds.
Quality lasts.
Jimdamick
Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
90 hour weeks?
mining is a dangerous occupation, if his supervisors and employer allowed him to work 90 hours in a week, then they were wasting their money on an exhgausted non productive and unsafe worker who is more likely to bring the work face down on himself and his co-workers than to produce any significant amount of ore.
i think you got the numbers screwed up, 45-50 hours is the limit for most mine workers, after that they become a liability.
90 hours/ pay period of two weeks is a rational and likely source of your error.
I found a price of $975 for a 23" 1969 RCA TV. The equivalent price today would be $6,184.02. Walmart sells a 24" TV for less than $150. Even if the average Walmart TV lasted only 2 years, you would have 40 years of TV for $3,000, which is half as much. I think most Walmart TVs last longer than 2 years, though (I know plenty of people who bought their TVs at Walmart since they usually have the best price--my old roommate bought his 4 years ago), which makes for an even better case. Your 1969 TV has lasted for 40 years because someone paid a fortune for it--of course the quality was better. But the price of the TV now is so low that it would make more economic sense to buy cheap TVs and replace them when they break then it would to spent lots of money on a very expensive TV.
By suggesting that quality problems overcome lower prices, you're basically saying that the consumers who have spent trillions of dollars at Walmart over the years are just morons incapable of making rational economic calculations. The TV example exposes this is a farce. The reason people began shopping at Walmart, continued shopping at Walmart, and still continue to shiop at Walmart is because, in aggregate, it delivers the best value to them--saving them tens of billions of dollars a year over what costs otherwise would have been. Your complaint about consumer culture, which no longer values service, quality, loyalty, or anything like that--favoring cheap, disposable, and easily replaced stuff instead--doesn't alter the economic reality. In some cases, choosing quality may make more economic sense than choosing cheap. But not in aggregate.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
They're unable to accumulate wealth as long as they borrow so they spend more than they earn. The borrower makes this choice of his own free will. Blaming the lender for the foolishness of the borrower is clearly misdirection.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Defeatist attitude. You surrender before the battle has even begun. Not a recipe for success.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
You are holding yourself down, not the system.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
So this is just a "Republicans bad, Democrats good" tirade. The early 80's saw an increase in living standards of the middle class, not a decline as you claim. You start with a false premise and reach a false conclusion. Obama's policies are crushing the middle class, not helping.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
A Democrat majority in Congress controlled spending, budget, and borrowing. But somehow you blame Reagan. Sigh. I think someone has been lying to you.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Silver and gold are dropping in value right now. Kinda blows your idea right out of the water.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Would you still buy them now? Would you buy tulip bulbs now? Edit: Inquiring minds want to know!
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
Paper markets crashed bro, demand for physicals hasn't been as high since the crash of 08.
Kinda blows YOUR notion out of the water.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Wouldn't that be investing in stupidity? Sounds like a good investment to me.
