The problem here is that your employment doesn't solely depend on the choices you make. There is also luck, good and bad, as well as a lot of predetermined factors like how well an education your parents can afford, attributes are born with etc.
Mrs. Shank had bad luck and now is in a miserable situation. I think its morally condemnable to make her life even more miserable by taking all her money which could have been avoidable and actually been made into an advantage by Wal-Mart as they could have made good PR out of it, going by "We take care of our employees, we give when you are in need" etc.
The corporate profit does rarely equal the morally good or even acceptable, but there are ways to achieve both. Wal-Mart as it seems is eager to throw away the morally acceptable if it means higher profits, putting them into the evil column in my book, right next to gun manufacturers and HMOs.
Unions are good in theory, but I've also seen a lot of damage and inefficiency caused by unions. The problem is that a lot of unions become self-feeding monsters that care more about their own growth than the welfare of the employees.
This is also true of the companies themselves. It's really a sticky situation... how do you prevent that sort of behavior without an enforcing body that is large enough to be prone to that sort of behavior itself?
Assuming that nobody is forced to work there, market forces should force Wal-Mart to provide pay and benefits that are acceptable to the work force.
Once a company reaches a certain size, it's ability to weather labor shortages is greater than the average laborer's ability to weather income shortages. Most people nowadays buy food and rent shelter, which makes their demand for cash highly inelastic. The idea with unions (not that this is always the reality) is that if the laborers pool their resources, they'll be able to prolong their ability to weather shortages in a similar manner to the companies, equalizing their bargaining power.
Let me ask you this... Do these retail jobs suck? Yes. But, as an adult, if your only qualifications are to work at Wal-Mart, you've obviously made some very poor choices in your life. What's so bad about rewarding those who make good choices? Should all jobs be the same? Shouldn't those who work hard and make good decisions enjoy better jobs and more benefits?
A valid point. I think a larger problem is that a lot of people not cut out for the rat race don't really have anywhere else to go. There isn't really any way to opt out. The family farm was sold before they were born, and even if they somehow were given one (homesteads on the Moon? :P), they wouldn't know what to do with it.
I think the core of why America is such a fucked up country in my view is that many things that directly influence the general well-being of people, such as health care or as a minor example school lunches, are either run by or heavily influenced by for-profit organizations who only seek cheapest and therefore most rudimentary solutions.
Sounds like capitalism to me.
the evil column in my book, right next to gun manufacturers
I used to work for a major grocery store chain, and when I did was part of the UFCW (United Food & Commercial Workers union). The magazine we got every month with the union news told us we should hate Wal-Mart, basically telling us that that they were evil because they weren't in the union and thus weren't giving their employees the wages and benefits they deserved. After leaving that job (it is a long story so I won't share it here) I looked over my old pay stubs and found that the union through membership dues was actually taking such a big chunk of what I was making, the increased wage wasn't something that effected me that much.
I never hated the place, I've found it a good place to buy stuff at bargain prices. I think that it is a business like any other, and have found out the perfect formula to get the most customers. good prices + variety of products and services in one place = $$$$
Comments
Mrs. Shank had bad luck and now is in a miserable situation. I think its morally condemnable to make her life even more miserable by taking all her money which could have been avoidable and actually been made into an advantage by Wal-Mart as they could have made good PR out of it, going by "We take care of our employees, we give when you are in need" etc.
The corporate profit does rarely equal the morally good or even acceptable, but there are ways to achieve both. Wal-Mart as it seems is eager to throw away the morally acceptable if it means higher profits, putting them into the evil column in my book, right next to gun manufacturers and HMOs.
I never hated the place, I've found it a good place to buy stuff at bargain prices. I think that it is a business like any other, and have found out the perfect formula to get the most customers. good prices + variety of products and services in one place = $$$$