Why doesn't the Tea Party hate Wal-Mart?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Wal-Mart is one of the biggest causes of government assistance in the country. In Georgia some stores even handed out applications for food stamps to new hires. For all of krazen's rantings about "moochers" you'd think there'd be at least some ire directed to the sources of a lot of that. But you never hear conservatives attacking Wal-Mart or other corporations that basically are responsible for government dependency...and often are quite the moochers themselves.

[John Dibble]

Is your title question supposed to be "Why doesn't the Tea Party hate Wal-Mart?" - what you're saying doesn't quite match up to the title.

[Lief 🗽]

The Tea Party supports corporate welfare, just not regular welfare.

[memphis]

The Tea Party supports corporate welfare, just not regular welfare.

Not true. Tea Partiers are 100% entitled to their Social Security and Medicare.

[Lief 🗽]

True. They support corporate welfare and welfare for old white people.

[opebo]

The answer is they worship the Waltons because they have billions of dollars and pay their workforce a below-subsistence pittance.  To the Tea Partiers the Waltons are the ideal Americans.

[Person Man]

True. They support corporate welfare and welfare for old white people.

The answer is they worship the Waltons because they have billions of dollars and pay their workforce a below-subsistence pittance.  To the Tea Partiers the Waltons are the ideal Americans.

End of story.

[courts]

The Tea Party supports corporate welfare, just not regular welfare.

Not true. Tea Partiers are 100% entitled to their Social Security and Medicare.

but not younger people, we need to sacrifice for our children's future you see. but yes a general litmus test for the tea baggers is that if they use a government program its an earned benefit. if someone else uses it, then it's welfare and yet another handout to the 47% of takers.

[Person Man]

The Tea Party supports corporate welfare, just not regular welfare.

Not true. Tea Partiers are 100% entitled to their Social Security and Medicare.

but not younger people, we need to sacrifice for our children's future you see. but yes a general litmus test for the tea baggers is that if they use a government program its an earned benefit. if someone else uses it, then it's welfare and yet another handout to the 47% of takers.

Makes you yearn for the time when the only things that were sacrificed were goats.

[Stranger in a strange land]

Because in Tea Party World, Walmart employees are on Welfare and Food Stamps because they're lazy, not because their employer won't pay them a decent wage.

[publicunofficial]

Most of the old cranky white people in my town hate Wal-Mart because they worship the idea of small businesses, which Wal-Mart drives out of business, and see Wal-Mart's moving into small town as "urbanization"

[Indy Texas]

There's an article in Forbes pointing out that engaging in that line of attack could backfire.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If the Democrats want to change the conversation on this, they ought to hammer home the fact that the Republican mantra that employment eliminates dependency and precludes requiring welfare benefits holds absolutely no water in the 21st century. The dichotomy of a person working and being self-sufficient or a person not working and getting money from the state is a false one. The real choice is between working and needing a little bit of public assistance or not working and needing a lot more public assistance. We can tinker with the minimum wage, but it ultimately boils down to a question of how many poor people you want to be employed versus unemployed and the degree to which their income is going to be derived from transfer payments.

I'm sorry, progressives, but if you have a McDonald's franchise with 20 people making $8 an hour, and you raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour, you're not going to have 20 people making $15 an hour. You're going to have less than 20 people making $15 an hour and the remainder not working at all and needing even more state assistance than they would have needed if they worked at McDonald's for $8 an hour. Conversely, Republicans, the McDonald's owner is not going to go all Ayn Rand and shut down his restaurant and go live in Galt's Gulch.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Most of the old cranky white people in my town hate Wal-Mart because they worship the idea of small businesses, which Wal-Mart drives out of business, and see Wal-Mart's moving into small town as "urbanization"

That's actually a pretty consistent view with supporting free market capitalism, so not surprising.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

There's an article in Forbes pointing out that engaging in that line of attack could backfire.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If the Democrats want to change the conversation on this, they ought to hammer home the fact that the Republican mantra that employment eliminates dependency and precludes requiring welfare benefits holds absolutely no water in the 21st century. The dichotomy of a person working and being self-sufficient or a person not working and getting money from the state is a false one. The real choice is between working and needing a little bit of public assistance or not working and needing a lot more public assistance. We can tinker with the minimum wage, but it ultimately boils down to a question of how many poor people you want to be employed versus unemployed and the degree to which their income is going to be derived from transfer payments.

I'm sorry, progressives, but if you have a McDonald's franchise with 20 people making $8 an hour, and you raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour, you're not going to have 20 people making $15 an hour. You're going to have less than 20 people making $15 an hour and the remainder not working at all and needing even more state assistance than they would have needed if they worked at McDonald's for $8 an hour. Conversely, Republicans, the McDonald's owner is not going to go all Ayn Rand and shut down his restaurant and go live in Galt's Gulch.

The problem with the analogy is that Wal-Mart does more than just pay their employees crap, they hurt other businesses (and not just other retailers, many of the companies that make the stuff they sell have been deeply hurt by Wal-Mart's demands to set their prices) and drive down wages in general. McDonald's isn't exactly a stellar company either, but no five star restaurant is going to worry about going out of business because of competition if a McDonald's opens up across the street from them, even though their food is obviously going to be far more expensive.

What's also kind of funny is that Adam Smith actually warned about Wal-Mart-esque practices and was actually in favor of regulation to prevent such things since a monopoly isn't any more of a free market than socialist state control. Of course how many teabaggers are aware that Smith was also supportive of labor unions?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

They're also more likely than Democrats to approve of the bloated department that gets 58% of discretionary spending.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

They like shopping there.   Or they know that other people shop there and like the prices.

[DC Al Fine]

62% of Democrats like the IRS? Surprising

[memphis]

Nobody likes shopping at WalMart. It's an unpleasant chore just like cleaning a toilet. But it's nicer to have a clean toilet than a dirty one. And liking what you do is for people with options.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Nobody likes shopping at WalMart. It's an unpleasant chore just like cleaning a toilet. But it's nicer to have a clean toilet than a dirty one. And liking what you do is for people with options.

People like saving money, and may also like being able to do a lot of different shopping at a single store.

[Ban my account ffs!]

Nobody likes shopping at WalMart. It's an unpleasant chore just like cleaning a toilet. But it's nicer to have a clean toilet than a dirty one. And liking what you do is for people with options.

People like saving money, and may also like being able to do a lot of different shopping at a single store.

Saving money is a relative term when you look at how dependent Wal-Mart is on the government to survive in its current model.

And shopping at a single store is convenient... but that has nothing to do with prices or welfare.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

Those who shop at Walmart are typically unaware they're buying "Walmart quality," which carries a far lower standard than what large brands sell elsewhere.



OMG look at those dealz

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Nobody likes shopping at WalMart. It's an unpleasant chore just like cleaning a toilet. But it's nicer to have a clean toilet than a dirty one. And liking what you do is for people with options.

People like saving money, and may also like being able to do a lot of different shopping at a single store.

Saving money is a relative term when you look at how dependent Wal-Mart is on the government to survive in its current model.

And shopping at a single store is convenient... but that has nothing to do with prices or welfare.

But it does have to do with why Tea Partiers don't all hate Walmart.

[opebo]

Nobody likes shopping at WalMart. It's an unpleasant chore just like cleaning a toilet. But it's nicer to have a clean toilet than a dirty one. And liking what you do is for people with options.

People like saving money, and may also like being able to do a lot of different shopping at a single store.

memphis understands that capitalism does not serve the 'consumer', while shua is deluded on that score.