|
Post by Phalon on Dec 15, 2013 8:51:58 GMT -6
Tough call, Katina. There was no doubt the girl committed a crime, two of them actually, by not paying the fare, and then slapping the officer trying to apprehend her. But to be slammed into the ground head-first, then detained there for 8 minutes, I think is more than a bit excessive use of force in relation to the crime. In my opinion, both of them should have been charged with assault, not just the girl. And speaking of disturbing news stories, this makes me sick. What the hell is going on in our judicial system that this can be considered a defense: "According to news reports, a psychologist hired by 16-year-old Ethan Couch said the teenager was a victim of 'affluenza', a condition caused by the sort of absurdly permissive home life that comes with being wealthy." The kid killed 4 people and injured 9 others in a drunk-driving accident....and the judge in the case gives him 10 years probation because of he suffers from some made-up affliction caused by having too much wealth? WTF?! It's scary to think what kind of precedent this sets. news.yahoo.com/judge-says-drunk-teen-too-rich-pay-price-020856304.html
|
|
|
Post by katina2nd on Dec 15, 2013 18:58:23 GMT -6
Tough call, Katina. There was no doubt the girl committed a crime, two of them actually, by not paying the fare, and then slapping the officer trying to apprehend her. But to be slammed into the ground head-first, then detained there for 8 minutes, I think is more than a bit excessive use of force in relation to the crime. In my opinion, both of them should have been charged with assault, not just the girl. Yep, the girl is not blameless for sure, though I think the slap was a natural reaction to suddenly being grabbed in the manner that she was, while the inspectors action was nothing short of assualt as I see it, and should (and hopefully will) be viewed as such and dealt with accordingly; if that was "in accordance with company policy" as Metro trains said, then they need to urgently review their policy. There seems to have been a spate of disturbing occurrences in recent times regarding people in authority, such as these two ..... www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-20/police-tasers-under-scrutiny-after-cctv-shows-brutal-arrest/5106060I realise the police have a difficult job, but that doesn't excuse actions such as those, and also makes me wonder just how prevalent it is. And speaking of disturbing news stories, this makes me sick. What the hell is going on in our judicial system that this can be considered a defense: "According to news reports, a psychologist hired by 16-year-old Ethan Couch said the teenager was a victim of 'affluenza', a condition caused by the sort of absurdly permissive home life that comes with being wealthy." The kid killed 4 people and injured 9 others in a drunk-driving accident....and the judge in the case gives him 10 years probation because of he suffers from some made-up affliction caused by having too much wealth? WTF?! It's scary to think what kind of precedent this sets. news.yahoo.com/judge-says-drunk-teen-too-rich-pay-price-020856304.html Saw this on tele the other day and like you was dumbfounded as well. The judge said that he was responsible for what happened, but because he wouldn't receive the therapy he needed in jail she virtually sets him free with a slap on the wrist. Maybe he does need therapy but I'm sorry, you don't kill four people and destroy countless other lives and not expect to be held accountable IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Scrappy Amazon on Dec 16, 2013 10:49:00 GMT -6
Hey Bud.....Here's a villainous deed for ya.
|
|
|
Post by katina2nd on Dec 17, 2013 18:39:04 GMT -6
Why am I not surprised that it would be you performing such a deed? At least it's found a good home, one of the few around here who appreciates a nicely aged fruitcake, and this one must be really aged by now.
|
|
|
Post by Scrappy Amazon on Dec 21, 2013 8:27:18 GMT -6
hey...is that a besmirching of my character? LOL
|
|
|
Post by katina2nd on Dec 24, 2013 19:57:53 GMT -6
hey...is that a besmirching of my character? LOL Now I ask you, would I be courageous, or silly enough to do that.
|
|
|
Post by katina2nd on Mar 13, 2014 19:45:17 GMT -6
Wasn't sure where to put this, so guess here is as good a place as any.
Anyone have a Walmart store in their town? Saw a doco on them the other day, now I'm not sure if the makers embellished the facts or not, but Walmart came out looking like the company from hell, so bad in fact it made me wonder if a bit of artistic license wasn't taken with the show.
From paying rock bottom wages, expecting people to put in an hour or more a day of unpaid overtime, shoddy enviromental practices, virtual slave conditions for their workers in China and other countries, the list goes on and on.
Near the end of the program it showed a list (fairly lengthy) of the towns that have rejected them from moving in, I'm just surprised they haven't been given the boot everywhere else, "if" in fact everything in the show was 100% accurate.
Seem to recall Phalon being less them complimentary of them on occasion.
|
|
|
Post by Scrappy Amazon on Mar 13, 2014 19:50:36 GMT -6
I'd like to pipe in....
Evil Empire. That's all I'm going to say. They are watching.
|
|
|
Post by katina2nd on Mar 13, 2014 19:53:17 GMT -6
Sheesh, now ya got me worried, should I delete my post?
|
|
|
Post by Scrappy Amazon on Mar 13, 2014 20:15:18 GMT -6
Hmm....just slap on a smiley face.
|
|
|
Post by Phalon on Mar 14, 2014 4:15:08 GMT -6
BOLL. You two crack me up. Hubs calls Walmart "The Great Satan". (oops) I don't have first hand knowledge about how they treat their employees, but from a consumer's standpoint, I dislike them. Immensely. I only go there when I can't get whatever I need somewhere else in town (it's either that, or drive 50 miles round trip to a city). And "whatever I need" I often used to be able to get here in town until Walmart put the smaller retailers out of business with their "we will not be undersold" policy.
|
|
|
Post by katina2nd on Mar 14, 2014 20:32:07 GMT -6
Hubs calls Walmart "The Great Satan". (oops) I don't have first hand knowledge about how they treat their employees, but from a consumer's standpoint, I dislike them. Immensely. I only go there when I can't get whatever I need somewhere else in town (it's either that, or drive 50 miles round trip to a city). And "whatever I need" I often used to be able to get here in town until Walmart put the smaller retailers out of business with their "we will not be undersold" policy. Yeah that was just one of the complaints in the film, the way small businesses were forced out of existence. This is the doco that I saw ..... www.bravenewfilms.org/walmartmoviewell worth a look if you're interested, it's not going to improve your view of them that's for sure. Whoops, forgot the smiley faces.
|
|
|
Post by stepper on Mar 15, 2014 16:19:22 GMT -6
I don't think they're the company from hell, but their management maybe be related to some of the residents. Their business model is very successful, and predatory.
They represent a substantial business empire with stores so close that you’d think they are in competition with themselves. There are two super Wal-Marts in close proximity to my home and a third one is going up soon – much to the discontent of the residents in the area where the store will be erected. (The situation is so contentious the residents in the city where the new one is going up forced a recall election of the local officials and successfully removed four of the six incumbents.) The discontent received considerable attention from the local news media, but the store is going up because there is no legal way to stop it and Wal-Mart knows "if you build it, they will come.” They always do.
Here’s the problem: they are VERY successful, and the only way they can be successful is when they have high levels of patronage. Here’s a few statistics: The total amount of money spent in Wal-Mart stores is $36,000,000 – per hour. Wal-Mart employs 2,000,000 people. Ninety percent of Americans live within 15 minutes of a Wal-Mart. Eight cents of every dollar made in the US is spent in a Wal-Mart store.
The reason I say they can’t exactly be the store from hell is you don’t get those kinds of results from being a “bad” store. They do in fact drive out competition – mostly because it’s hard to beat their prices. (Something like 80% of their suppliers are in China.) They are willing go to locations where the local population isn’t interested, but they’ve found that the locals will show up once the store is there no matter how much of a protest was presented. And don’t misunderstand the protests. Here, the media mantra is “If it bleeds it leads.” Good news is reserved for the last minute of the broadcast. The fact that the vast majority of the stores go up to welcoming crowds and communities is ignored. So, perhaps the doom and gloom of a coming store is a tempest in a teacup.
I generally take the indications of a hoax and apply them to all correspondence that isn’t personal or obviously simply for entertainment. If there is implied urgency, insistence of credibility (sometimes including some form of corroboration), an indication of dire consequences of some sort, and history (does the e-mail have several “>>>” marks where it has been forwarded often or a web page counter showing numerous hits) then it is time for verification because it smells like ‘it’, what ever it is, is phony to some extent.
Like Phalon, I find that I’m in Wal-Mart every once in a while because they have something that other local stores don’t carry and I don’t want to drive two hours just because I don’t want to go to their store.
|
|
|
Post by katina2nd on Mar 15, 2014 19:24:06 GMT -6
Here’s the problem: they are VERY successful, and the only way they can be successful is when they have high levels of patronage. Here’s a few statistics: The total amount of money spent in Wal-Mart stores is $36,000,000 – per hour. Wal-Mart employs 2,000,000 people. Ninety percent of Americans live within 15 minutes of a Wal-Mart. Eight cents of every dollar made in the US is spent in a Wal-Mart store. The reason I say they can’t exactly be the store from hell is you don’t get those kinds of results from being a “bad” store. Afraid I don't see a collelation between those two points Step' being successful doesn't exclude them from being a rotten company surely. They can treat their employees like c**p (while at the same time calling them "associates") pay them rock bottom wages while going to extraordinary lengths to keep unions out, have their employees in China and other countries working in appaling conditions, lie in court and so on and still be successful because the vast majority of their customers don't know (or care) about such things as long as they're getting something cheaper then they else might. The discontent received considerable attention from the local news media, but the store is going up because there is no legal way to stop it and Wal-Mart knows "if you build it, they will come.” They always do. I take it you mean in this specific instance, because they can, and are, being kept out of a growing number of communities. As I stated before, I have no way of verifying everything in the film, but if it's even 25% accurate then Walmart qualify for the "company from hell" tag in my book. Have you seen it by the way?
|
|
|
Post by Scrappy Amazon on Mar 16, 2014 8:37:34 GMT -6
I saw that documentary you are referring to a while back. I have to say that I believe, despite my extreme dislike of the company-which-shall-not-be-named, the documentary had it's own decided slant. Step is right, they are very successful. And you are right, that doesn't excuse them from being douchbags.
There was a part in there (if we are talking about the same documentary) about a small family owned hardware store I think. The family that owned it talked about how they couldn't compete and soon would be closing their doors. They also talked about how there was a local guy who through whatever fault had ended up living in his car and they blamed Walmart for his inability to get a job. I thought to myself, if they were so concerned about his well being then why didn't this family run hardware store offer the guy a job? Because they chose to hire only family members to work there. Cousins and brother's and sisters. Why? For the same reason Walmart hires poor uneducated people. It's cheaper and it keeps the profit margins up.
You want to make a point about Walmart.....Don't pick someone who does the same thing on a smaller scale. Problem is that Walmart doesn't understand that if you treat the people who work for you better, they work harder. They become invested in how the company does. They take less time off they get sick less and they tend to work harder for less money.
Take a look at Costco's business model. They pay an average wadge of 12.00. Their CEO makes less than a million dollars a year. They are union. They have benefits like paid vacation and medical and dental insurance. (Which is compliant with the new ACA) And they STILL have a huge profit margin and their yearly projections for their stock holders keep going up.
Greed is the only thing that Walmart is for. The top six people at Walmart make more money every year than EVERY employee combined x 3. How is that appropriate?
Personally I won't go in there. Period. If I have to have something cheap that bad, I'll order it online from someone else.
|
|
|
Post by katina2nd on Mar 16, 2014 18:34:13 GMT -6
I saw that documentary you are referring to a while back. I have to say that I believe, despite my extreme dislike of the company-which-shall-not-be-named, the documentary had it's own decided slant. Yep, no doubt about the intention of the show, it was to show Wal... errr the company-which-shall-not-be-named, in the worst possible light, which is why I said that we have to be a bit cautious about excepting everything at face value. They seemed to back most of their claims with fairly compelling evidence though, as well as statements from Judges, Ministers and community leaders as well as former employees, so unless everyone was telling porkies (or the program simply distorted the facts) TCWSNBN came out looking, to use your word, like a bunch of douchbags.
|
|
|
Post by Phalon on Mar 18, 2014 7:00:00 GMT -6
I think that case may not be representative of why Walmart hurts the majority smaller businesses, Scrappy. Just one of the reasons small businesses fail when Walmart moves in is that Walmart contracts product in large quantities - quantities that smaller independent retailers can't possibly afford to buy, store, and sell. Therefore suppliers contract their product to Walmart at a much lower price than is offered to retailers who buy in small quantity. The kicker is that Walmart only pays that supplier for the product they actually sell, not what they order; small businesses pay for what is ordered, regardless if it sells or not.
Because they buy product at lower costs, they can use a higher mark-up percentage, make a larger profit, and still often price the product below what an independent retailer has to price an item at to make a marginal profit. Their retail costs are sometimes lower than what a small business can buy the same product from the same supplier at wholesale. Take Scotts fertilizers, for example - we (the nursery) can go into Walmart and buy a bag of fertilizer at the lower price than the wholesale price that Scotts sells it to the nursery. We don't sell Scotts for that reason opting to go with product - better product actually, but at a higher price - that only sells to independent retailers.
Whether a consumer wants to pay more for a better quality product, or go with a lesser product at a lower price can be the difference between a business failing when Walmart moves in. But when you consider why Walmart is "bad", you have to consider what it does to small businesses as part of the broad picture.
|
|
|
Post by Scrappy Amazon on Mar 18, 2014 7:19:02 GMT -6
All very valid points! And very well explained. Bottom line. They suck. But do we think they suck because they are successful and cheap or because they treat people like shit? They sell cheap shit to poor people who can't afford the good stuff and they employ fairly unemployable people and get away treating them badly because of that.
|
|
|
Post by katina2nd on Mar 18, 2014 18:09:38 GMT -6
Doesn't hurt their bottom line that they received over a billion dollars in subsidies from the communities they moved into either I guess (not sure if that was for one year or not) money that could have been spent on schools/teachers/amenities etc.
Can only hope they don't cast their greedy eyes toward Australia, small business is doing it hard enough already competing against the major chains.
|
|
|
Post by Phalon on Mar 19, 2014 5:41:38 GMT -6
HA! You are too kind. I just reread what I wrote and thought, (never-mind all the typos), what the hell was I trying to say?
That pretty much explains it all.
Keeping fingers crossed for you, Katina, that you never have to set foot in a Walmart in your neck of the world.
|
|
|
Post by katina2nd on Oct 21, 2014 18:33:35 GMT -6
Any thoughts on Oscar Pistorius, victim? villain?
Was five years an adequate sentence or manifestly inadequate?
|
|
|
Post by Spock on Oct 21, 2014 20:32:05 GMT -6
Sorry, I don't know enough about the case to even have an opinion. I do know that if he cared for her and it was an accident, he will suffer far longer than 5 years.
|
|
|
Post by Phalon on Oct 22, 2014 16:44:12 GMT -6
Don't know much about it either - probably less than Spock. I think though, the manslaughter (or the equivalent; I forgot the term they use there) conviction seems to warrant a greater sentence than 10 months (the actual time he will spend in prison). Ten months time served for killing a person? Seems kind of lenient to me.
|
|
|
Post by katina2nd on Oct 22, 2014 18:28:37 GMT -6
"Culpable Homicide" is what he was convicted of, and have to agree, five years, or more likely less then one, seems extraordinarily lenient for taking a life in such a manner.
Seems almost inconceivable to me that someone hearing noises coming from the bathroom in the middle of the night would conclude that it was intruders and fire five shots trough the door, without at the very least checking to see if his girlfriend was in the bed with him.
|
|
|
Post by stepper on Oct 22, 2014 19:29:24 GMT -6
I have an opinion not based substantially in fact. That said, I'm thinking that a well trained athlete who recovered from and over came his physical problems, someone who qualified for the Olympics (which includes training involving mental preparedness), was not confused, dazed, or so drowsy that his actions were even remotely justified. He has essentially gotten away with murder - and I bet it has something to do with ego.
|
|
|
Post by katina2nd on Oct 23, 2014 23:32:25 GMT -6
Fear you may be right Step' as I said, if you heard noises during the night surely the first thing you'd do is check your partners whereabouts.
|
|
|
Post by stepper on Oct 24, 2014 13:16:55 GMT -6
Unfortunately Kat, this isn't restricted to Aussie land. We have no end of questionable decisions here too. And we're about to get one that no matter the decision, and no matter how fact based the explanation, the result is going to p!ss off one group or the other and our TV news people will all be only too happy to talk to the ones who feel the decision is wrong. You know how it is - if it bleeds it leads - bad news is good news.
|
|
|
Post by Mini Mia on Oct 24, 2014 23:36:31 GMT -6
Sounds totally fishy to me. I think his future actions may prove whether he's guilty or innocent though. How fast he bounces back, maybe? How fast he finds a new girlfriend . . . he's bound to give himself away at some point. If he's cocky like others who have gotten away with murder in the past.
|
|
|
Post by stepper on Oct 25, 2014 7:26:54 GMT -6
But will he still be news when that happens? Unless something dramatic accompanies the revelation, we'll never hear about it.
|
|
|
Post by Mini Mia on Oct 27, 2014 0:20:51 GMT -6
I'm sure some will keep an eye on him. Reporters tend to like to put out updates now and again.
|
|