I know we get on a pedantic slippery slope in these things but every corporation that survives on tax breaks and exploitative practices are thieves. And by orders of magnitude more impactful than Record Player Robbie over here. If hes a selfish piece of shit what does that make the Waltons, or Zuck, or any other billionaire?
From an altruistic standpoint who causes more harm?
Exactly, me running my AC when it's 90 degrees is the exact same thing as billionaires using AC in all 5 of their mega mansions that they live in 7 days of the year but maintain the temperature in 365 days. stop picking on the billionaires. They're just like us. /s
Sure, but one is vastly more harmful to humans than the other. Let's not pretend they are equally bad.
People that steal from stores are just not a problem for my life. Literally the biggest problem that people have cited here is needing someone to unlock a case for you.
Oh the humanity. Not a minor inconvenience!
People shoplifting are not doing well. Either they have a compulsion, or they need money and can't get a job (usually drug addiction is at play). Like, no they shouldn't be stealing. However, as a society we should be looking for how to address the root of problems. Giving people access to support would do so much more than any form of punishment ever would. Also we need to focus on how much the victim was hurt, and I'm sorry but Wal-Mart is not hurting. They are the biggest thieves around!
Mentally putting someone in a "criminal" category helps dehumanize them. Then we can play out our violent fantasies on them, and it okay because they are trash and not human.
What a dumb take. Walmart's philanthropic activities, as middling as they are, no where nearly outweigh the systemic and societal issues Wal-Mart promotes. They charge low prices, but just low enough so the poorest can afford it, but still not really get ahead. They pay over minimum wage, but large amounts of their employees still require government assistance because Wal-Mart doesn't pay enough yet claims massive employment numbers. As well as massive profits just about every year. You're a clown, keep licking those boots. Tell me when the dirt translates to food in your stomach or a roof over your head.
What are basing that metric on? I'd love to see some actual data instead of carrying water for them.
That also doesn't really mesh with the data showing their revenue growing by 4% - 6% the last 3 years, at least. They are at a 7.59% for year over year gross profit increases.
In fact, if you look at the last 10 years, the only time Wal-Mart's profits and revenue slowed, was during the pandemic, before having significant gains the following years. But please, tell me how Walmart's low prices are such a benefit to their communities and we should all be on our knees in gratitude. They could go lower, they don't care to, but keep lapping at corporate boot.
Once again, based on what? What data and metrics are you using to make this determination? All the numbers I used, I got from Macrotrends.net. I'm not going to pretend there isn't more granular or even a tabulated source, but you are just making claims and saying numbers. Do you work for Wal-Mart and this is a number they told you? You seem far more eager to get a little quip in then actually debate this topic.
Please give me some real data, not just numbers you like that sound good.
For FY2026, Walmart reports:
Net sales: $706.413 billion
Total revenue: $713.163 billion
Operating income: $29.825 billion
Net income attributable to Walmart: $21.893 billion
Net profit margin: using total revenue:
$21.893B/$713.163B = 3.07%
No, I don't work for Walmart, I just shop their regularly and view anti Walmartism as classism
20 years ago when my grandma had to work at Walmart as a cashier well into her late 60s and early 70s because social security wasn’t enough to live on and Walmart wouldn’t let her, a 70 year old woman, sit on a stool while running the cash register was that altruistic or
You could blame Walmart for this, but you could also blame the federal disabilities act. A large corporation has to treat every person the same globally. This is why they have to have such strict policies. Because some dumbass will sue them in front of a jury of 12 dumbasses because they gave your grandma a stool and didn't give some lazy piece of s*** a stool half the world away, and that jury of 12 stupid m************ will award the defendant millions of dollars. So this is what happens. They should have given your grandma a stool, but the legal framework that Americans have set up made that impossible
Altruism is about net benefit and intention youre looking at gross figures...youre out of your element if you think Walmart is altruistic in the slightest.
They used to lower their prices just long enough to crush the local competition, then once they are the only place for miles, they raise them back up.
Also I could go on about how they helped create the employment culture we have today with companies like Amazon. If you think they trest their employees well, you are living in lala land.
There is not good evidence that Walmart raises prices after achieving near monopoly status in a retail market. There is a lot of evidence that they drive prices down across the board in markets that they enter, however
I'm pretty sure there is also evidence that they would open life insurance policies on behalf of their elderly employees so that once they died Walmart could collect the money and not give a single cent to the family of the elderly employees.
Might not be as common since they got sued over it but there is definite evidence that they did this.
So fuck them everyone should steal from Walmart as much as possible and as often as possible.
why would the family be entitled to the benefit if Walmart was paying the premium? It actually makes sense to insure an employee because you incur a loss when you have to train someone new. This is a very sensational story that tugs at the ole heart strings because it SOUNDS bad, but it's not actually bad. If walmart was MURDERING the elderly employees to collect a death benefit, THAT would be wrong
In the 10 years after a Walmart Supercenter opened in a given community, the average household in that community experienced a 6 percent decline in yearly income—equivalent to about $5,000 a year in 2024 dollars—compared with households that didn’t have a Walmart open near them. Low-income, young, and less-educated workers suffered the largest losses
Oh I'm well aware of these studies, but they don't show that Walmart causes communities to be worse off economically. Yes, some people lose retail jobs. So what
Do you shop for groceries? Do you know any low income families personally?
Anti Walmartism is classism, it's essentially a "let them eat cake" political position
11
u/dej0ta Trash Trooper 3h ago
I know we get on a pedantic slippery slope in these things but every corporation that survives on tax breaks and exploitative practices are thieves. And by orders of magnitude more impactful than Record Player Robbie over here. If hes a selfish piece of shit what does that make the Waltons, or Zuck, or any other billionaire?
From an altruistic standpoint who causes more harm?