BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Mar 14 - 12:32 PM

And they're still a crap corporation that treats their employees like shit.

The poster-boys for predatory capitalism.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 26 Mar 14 - 12:14 PM

If a corporation does not manipulate the market, it will not long survive.
Moreover, its aggressive actions forces competitors to develop counter-measures, leading to advances in marketing. If competitors can't compete, they die.

I don't like Walmart (employees poorly trained and/or lacking the attributes needed for better employment, and concentration on lower and middle range goods; leaving the best to others) so shop elsewhere, but its customers apparently like it because they not only go back but their numbers increase.

In Canada, Walmart purchased the unsuccessful Woolco/Woolworth chain (which also handled the lower range of goods), and are a profitable successor.
Their supermarket (largest of three outlets in Calgary) has popular tenants; a walk-in medical clinic, Tim Hortons, and McDonald's McCafe.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Mar 14 - 09:46 AM

MalWart is denigrated, and rightfully so, because it manipulates the market, because its a crap outfit that treats its employees (and ultimately its customers) like shit, and because its proud of it; not because of penis envy.

John D. Rockefeller and Standard Oil were pretty successful too. Ever read "The Octopus"?

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 25 Mar 14 - 07:59 PM

Walmart is denigrated by some here for their success.

I don't like the fact that it is family-held; all large corporations should be on the stock market.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Mar 14 - 11:58 AM

The Wal-Mart heirs are concerned with nothing but their own bottom line, the public and employees be damned. The good side of Wal-Mart will be when they go bankrupt.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: GUEST,calico1947
Date: 24 Mar 14 - 04:52 PM

The line in Fred Neil's "Handful of Gimme" is "Mouthful of Much Obliged" not "Mouthful of Multiplies."

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: robomatic
Date: 14 Sep 06 - 02:56 AM

OG:

I enjoyed those channels when I had access to cable, nevertheless they are like all television, an insatiable need to broadcast broadcast broadcast, hence there is some garbage that goes over those channels, aired broadcasts of hypothesis upon hypothesis. This may be a case.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Old Guy
Date: 14 Sep 06 - 12:17 AM

Robo:

I am just relating what they said.

I really like the Discovery Channel, History Channel. CSpan, etc. I am always drawn to them over movies, sitcoms and the other fictional stuff. If it wern't for those I would probably not watch except for news and weather.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: robomatic
Date: 13 Sep 06 - 09:28 PM

Old Guy:

The misapplication of Darwin's Theory of Natural Selection is known as "Social Darwinism" and is an excellent example of extreme misuse of science as mataphor. However, I don't think you should necessarily demonize John D. as a believer in it unless you have hard evidence, which you did not take the trouble to cite. (Yes, I know you said "like Rockefeller" but the poor dead white male has taken enough abuse already in this thread!)

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: bobad
Date: 13 Sep 06 - 09:16 PM

This is the Fred Neil song I had in mind - close but no cigar

Handful Of Gimme

Your waltz in here
With a handful of gimme
A mouthful of multiplies
I go home feeling empty
From all your signifies

I'd spend the last of my last ten cents
On a nickel bag of candy
And if I had just ten more cents
I think I would take a ride
On the Staten Island ferry

You waltz in here with a handful of gimme
A mouthful of sweet lovin' lies
I go limpin' home feelin' empty
Tears all in my eyes

I'd spend the last of my last ten cents
On a nickel bag of candy
And if I had just ten more cents
I think I would take a ride
On the Staten Island ferry

Your waltz in here
With a handful of gimme
A mouthful of multiplies
I go home feeling empty
From all your signifies

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: dianavan
Date: 13 Sep 06 - 08:47 PM

Greg - I think it was probably Sleepy John Estes that recorded that song. Thanks for returning the words to their original context.

Barry - Of course, Mose Allison. Brilliant lyrics! What did I do with those albums? Where did they go? Its been a long time but those words still ring true. The second verse is perfect.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Greg F.
Date: 13 Sep 06 - 01:36 PM

Its in Tom Rush's version of "Drop Down Mama" for which he credits "J. Estes"- whether that's Sleepy John or not I dunno.


Big city women, they sure do make me tired
They got a handfull of gimmie
Got a mouth full of much obliged
Mama don't allow me
To fool around all night long
She says "you may be too young
Some woman might do you wriong".

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Old Guy
Date: 13 Sep 06 - 11:24 AM

Please be a little more specific about what "that" is.

I saw something interesting last night on the Discovery channels about Darwin. His theory of evolution and survival of the fittest was used by some industrialists like Rockefeller to justify their predatory actions.

They thought they were an improved member of the species and they were entitled to "kill" off the others.

Darwin's position was that the survivors were not unnecessarily superior, just better adapted.

I can see Darwin's point because whatever conditions fostered a change in a certain species that made it better adapted could be reversed or change into a different condition that would cause that strain to loose that advantage and cease to be dominant and die out.

Walmart may well be in decline now.

In the mean time their charitable donations do not indicate evil anymore that charitable donations from other companies and foundations. I think if you compare how much they give compared to their profits and likewise for other companies and foundations, you can judge their level of benevolence or malevolence.

When I look around on the net I cannot find a direct comparison but from what I found, it seems to me that they give more than others.

I think it is patently absurd to say that charitable donations are an indication of wrongdoing.

I once gave a young lady the entire tuition to go to the Clown College in Sarasota Fla and did not ask to be repaid. It was somewhere between 2 and 3 thousand bucks. I asked my tax preparer if I could deduct it some how. He put it down as a scholarship and deducted it from my income. Therefore I did not have to pay taxes on that amount of money. In other words I got 28% of the money back, not 100%.

Is that considered evil? The young lady supplements her income by doing "Gigs" at local parties and events through an agent which I consider as a good thing.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: robomatic
Date: 13 Sep 06 - 06:04 AM

dianavan:

"Thats exactly how people like you rip off the tax system and deprive the less fortunate of basic food, shelter and clothing."

I know where you can find inexpensive clothing to donate!

"John D. and Wal-Mart are no different."

One was an extremely wealthy industrialist, deceased. The other is a huge commercial retail multinational outlet. Clear?

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Barry Finn
Date: 13 Sep 06 - 02:36 AM

Your Mind Is On Vacation

Mose Allison

Sitting there yakkin' right in my face
Coming on like you own the place
If silence was golden
You couldn't raise a dime
Cause your mind is on vacation and your mouth is working overtime

You're quoting figures, you're dropping names
You're telling stories, you're playing games
You always laugh when things ain't funny
You try to sound like you don't need money
If talk was criminal, you'd lead a life of crime
Cause your mind is on vacation and your mouth is working overtime

You know that life is short and talk is cheap
Don't make promises that you can't keep
If you don't like the song I'm singing, just grin and bear it
All I can say is if the shoe fits wear it

Barry
If you must keep talking please can you make it rhyme
Cause your mind is on vacation and your mouth is working overtime
Cause your mind is on vacation and your mouth is working overtime

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Old Guy
Date: 13 Sep 06 - 12:44 AM

Dianavan:

Please explain how people like me rip off the tax system.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Barry Finn
Date: 13 Sep 06 - 12:36 AM

"Your mind is on vacation and your mouth is working overtime"

Mose Allison(SP?) one of the ecent Jazz Greats.
I think it's from a song called "Mercy" or "Everybody Crying Mercy"
I'm going back to my late teens so I'm thinking mid 60's I may be mixing it with another song that was off ther same record album, maybe some one with a better memory can make right of this.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: dianavan
Date: 12 Sep 06 - 11:50 PM

Wrong again.

"Every person and corporation that donates anything gets a write off."

At least, in Canada, the donation must be to a non-profit organization or a political party in order to be deductable.

Of course, I would expect that you would know "all the angles".

Thats exactly how people like you rip off the tax system and deprive the less fortunate of basic food, shelter and clothing.

John D. and Wal-Mart are no different.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: robomatic
Date: 12 Sep 06 - 11:49 PM

I've been wondering 'zactly what the used underwear write-off is these days. What brand does Wal-Mart sell?

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Old Guy
Date: 12 Sep 06 - 10:58 PM

How naive. Even presidents get a write off from donating used underwear. Every person and corporation that donates anything gets a write off. I guess that means they are all evil according to Dianavan.

The more you donate, the more evil you are becuase you get a bigger write off? Or the less you donate, the more evil you are becuase you are selfish?

However if you read closely you will see the word foundation. That means an organization set up just to make charitable contributions.

Foundation:

A permanent fund established and maintained by contributions for charitable, educational, religious, research, or other benevolent purposes. An institution or association given to rendering financial aid to colleges, schools, hospitals, and charities and generally supported by gifts for such purposes.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: bobad
Date: 12 Sep 06 - 09:49 PM

I know it's from a Fred Neil song but don't offhand remember which one. I posted it on the "Guess The Song Thread" - the name of the song should be forthcoming.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: dianavan
Date: 12 Sep 06 - 09:44 PM

Not mine. I stole it from someone. Can't remember who. Its been rattling around in my head for a very long time.

Another great line that describes 'that guy' and the old man is:

"Your mind is on vacation and your mouth is working overtime."

Again, not mine.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: bobad
Date: 12 Sep 06 - 09:13 PM

"A handful of gimme and a mouthful of much obliged."

Great line that.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: dianavan
Date: 12 Sep 06 - 09:07 PM

I'm sure Wal-Mart gets a nice big tax write-off for all those benevolent donations. I don't think wages and health care benefits provide a profit motive.

Don't try to convince me that Wal-Mart or John D. ever contributed anything to anyone that didn't lead to a direct benefit for the owners.

Why should taxpayers subsidize Wal-Mart or any other business?

"A handful of gimme and a mouthful of much obliged."

...and we let them get away with it because a few of their products are a few cents cheaper.

The operative word here is CHEAP (in every way).

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Greg F.
Date: 12 Sep 06 - 03:47 PM

Robo- as I thought: you've read a single book and you're an instant expert. Therefore its YOUR viewpoint which is less than balanced, I fear. No point in continuing- get back to me when you've read a bit more widely.

Yup, you're right. The NY Times review- a socialist source.

As for Chernow's being a BIG book, I believe the Protocols Of The Elders of Zion is pretty large too.

Later-

= = = = = =

Douggie-Boy: Re-read the 07 Sep 06 - 12:14 AM post. Then re-read my 07 Sep 06 - 09:46 AM post v-e-r-y s-l-o-w-l-y. This time try for comprehension and retention.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: robomatic
Date: 12 Sep 06 - 01:23 AM

Greg F.

When you wrote: You're right, Robo- some of the robber barrons were utter shit, and some were even worse shit. I concede your point. I appreciate your open mindedness, yet I think you are revealing just a bit of bias. The main point, which you did concede, was that the robber barons were not all the same. John D., and for that matter Andrew Carnegie, accomplished a lot more for this country than, for example, Jay Gould.
I wasn't aware you'd made a 'dare'. Chernow is 'very' contemporary and I haven't heard you challenge the quality of his work. He presented most of the material without a value judgement of his own, although he repeated the value judgements of others. You have quoted a socialist source which is hardly balanced. Your own opinion, to which you are entitled, is not balanced. I have merely put forth some of the pretty good results of Rockefeller's activities in and out of business. As for the fact that it's a single book, yeah, but, Greg, it's a damn BIG single book with a big index.
Please feel free to recommend some other sources that are either 'unbiased' or more likely to present multiple viewpoints.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"Socialism is a great theory," a witty person once said, "The only problem is it can be realized"
and how right I was!
-Ephraim Kishon

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: DougR
Date: 12 Sep 06 - 12:44 AM

Greg F. "A few thousand bucks here or there"? Do you have ANY idea how much Wal-Mart contributes to charity, Greg, or are you just blowing smoke as usual?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Old Guy
Date: 11 Sep 06 - 10:46 PM

ExxonMobil announced on January 30 that it reaped $36 billion in profits in 2005--the largest annual profit ever by any American corporation.

Red Cross Donors of $100,000 - $499,999
3M Company
Aerobed         
AMC Theatres         
Archer Daniels Midland Company
Adobe Systems Incorporated         
AT&T Wireless         
Blue Cross Blue Shield of Florida
The Cannon Foundation, Inc.
Cargill
Clear Channel Communications         
Computer Associates
Costco Wholesale         
Delta Air Lines, Inc         
Enterprise Rent-A-Car Foundation         
Exxon Mobil Corporation
Ford Motor Company
Freddie Mac         

---

Wal-Mart/SAM'S CLUB Foundation
    * Wal-Mart foundation and stores have been consistent supporters of the American Red Cross Disaster Relief Fund since 1991, averaging $200,000 to $500,000 annually. This $1 million dollar gift is their largest ever single gift to the American Red Cross.

For the year ended Jan. 31, Wal-Mart said net sales were up 9.5% to $312.4 billion and net income rose 9.4% to a record $11.2 billion,

---

Donors of $50,000 - $99,999

Andreas Foundation
Bacardi-Martini USA
Bearing Point
Charles A. Frueauff Foundation
Citgo Petroleum Corporation
The Clorox Company
Federated Department Stores, Inc./
Burdines-Macy's
Florida Hospital Medical Center
The Frances Alexander Foundation
Food Lion, LLC
Gap Foundation
Gloria Estefan Foundation
James Graham Brown Foundation
John Deere Foundation
Kash n' Karry Food Stores, Inc.
Linkin Park
Northrop Grumman Corporation
Rand Insurance, Inc.
Sara Lee Branded Apparel
Siemens Corporation
Springs Industries
St. Paul Travelers
Sunbeam Products, Inc. Community Fund
SunTrust Bank
William G. and Marie Selby Foundation
Wyeth

---

Schering-Plough
    *Schering-Plough Corporation, a supporter of the American Red Cross at the chapter level and nationally, generously donated approximately 95,000 units of sunscreen for use by Red Cross disaster clients affected by Hurricanes Charlie, Frances, and Ivan.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Sep 06 - 09:41 PM

Yup, Fat Old Woody- a total of 16 million- just about .1% of of one years profits for Mal Wart. And it gets them a tax write-off.

Equavalent to a person making $35K a year giving the local volunteer fire department thirty five bucks.

Ya think Mr. Walton's gonna miss it? Or is it a cynical ploy for public relations, and a cheap ploy at that?

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Sep 06 - 07:04 PM

You're right, Robo- some of the robber barrons were utter shit, and some were even worse shit. I concede your point.

I credited the AUTHOR of the article, and you had no problem locating its web source, did you? Is the
>New York Times a "socialist website", too? They made many of the same points.

About Twain: yes, I did know, actually. I doubt there's much, if anything, you could tell me about Sam Clemens.

You still haven't answered my question asked several times now: have you read any of the CONTEMPORARY critics of Saint John, read any of the OTHER biograsphies & studies of the man, or is Chernow your sole source?

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Old Guy
Date: 11 Sep 06 - 07:51 AM

Walnart Contributions of $1 Million and Over
American Cancer Society
American Legion
American Red Cross
Boy Scouts
Boys & Girls Clubs
Children's Miracle Network
Girl Scouts
Laura Bush Library Foundation
National Council of La Raza
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
National Minority Supplier Development Council,
Business Consortium Fund
Salvation Army
United Negro College Fund
United Way
Veterans of Foreign Wars Foundation

George Soros's Democracy Alliance, a secretive coalition of almost 100 of America's wealthiest liberal donors, so far has pumped $50 million into left-wing think tanks and advocacy organizations in the last nine months, the Washington Post reported July 17. Organizers describe the financial push as the first phase in a long-term campaign to challenge conservatives.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: robomatic
Date: 11 Sep 06 - 02:58 AM

Old Guy: LOL

Greg F: You seem to feel that people are either angels or devils. Real people are all over the map. You seem to want to line up the robber barons against the wall. I want to distinguish among them that some were way better than others. I thought you agreed that Chernow, with the fairness or at least distance of time, DID give a balanced perspective on John D. Mark Twain, Ida Tarbell, Teddy Roosevelt said a lot of things. Mark Twain had a right to speak about the economy and the change in American life: He himself was obsessed with riches and 'the main chance'. He went broke investing in a typesetting machine. Are you aware that Mark Twain attributed to Henry Rogers, a co-owner with John D and fellow board memeber, who himself had many enemies, with rescuing him from finanacial insolvency.
Incidentally, you should have credited your extended quote above on the Chernow book to a socialist website. Nothing against socialists, but they can hardly be expected to maintain a 'fair and balanced' view of John D.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Old Guy
Date: 10 Sep 06 - 10:45 PM

"Either raise the wages or provide healthcare."

They do. It just dosen't suit the crybabies who ignore other companies that do the same thing.

Your protectionisim is kin to socialisim which is kin to communisim which failed the USSR and does a shitty job in North Korea.

Just go down to Walmart and get a bunch of cheap crying towels.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Sep 06 - 09:56 PM

Your interpretation of the man is very biased by principles put into practise well after his time...Your interpretation of the man is very biased by principles put into practise well after his time.


Sorry, Robo, but its hardly "my interpretation". I ask again: have you read his CONTEMPORARY critics- those that wrote of his activities during his lifetime: Tarbell, Teddy Roosevelt, Lloyd, dozens of others including Mark Twain? Apparently not.

You might get a more balanced view of the man should you care to sample a few authors in addition to Chernow.

The subsequent "crimes of the communists" don't make Trotsky's observation any less valid.

He did for oil what Bill Gates would later do for operating systems.

Precisely! they both ran monopolies & engaged in shady practices that led to legal action to break them up. You're not holding Microsoft up as a model corporation, I hope, or Gates as a model citizen.

You seem to be willing to absolve John D. senior- the prince of monopoly capitalists and a robber baron of renown- of any responsibility whatsoever in the corruption he participated in, the abject misery he caused, the lives he ENDED, and all the rest simply because toward the very end of his life he attempted to buy his way into heaven (like he bought his way into everything else in his life) by distributing an infinitesimal fraction of his accumulated wealth in "good works".

I don't think absolution can be purchased so cheaply, if at all. Apparently you do.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: dianavan
Date: 10 Sep 06 - 05:11 PM

"...Rockefeller and other industrial captains conspired to kill off competitive capitalism in favour of a new monopoly capitalism"

That seems to be the heart of the problem, Greg F.

I don't hear anyone condemning the small business entrepeneur or capitalism in general. Its 'monopoly capitalism' that threatens the American way of life. Communities deserve more than that.

...and there is no way taxpayers should have to foot the bill for those that are employed. Either raise the wages or provide healthcare.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: robomatic
Date: 10 Sep 06 - 04:26 PM

Greg F.: You seem to be making my points for me, though you only mention a very small part of the story, and if you're quoting Trotsky, be advised that the crimes of the Communists against the working poor, the agricultural poor, and freedom of thought and expression BEGGAR a thousand Rockefellers.

Rockefeller was a free-market rough and tumble capitalist among other free-market rough and tumble capitalists. The only difference was he was methodical, more intelligent than most, and, as you say, lucky. The era changed around him and what was regular business in his youth became re-defined in later years, I think appropriately. The problem with your attitude is you are using the standards of today to judge the deeds of yesterday, and you are woefully inadequate in your choice of events: Mark Twain lamented the change of attitude regarding the Gold Rush in one sentence you quote, but you leave out the fact that in 1849 when the Gold Rush was occurring, Slavery was well entrenched and likely to remain so.

John D.'s long life shows a man who was capable of learning and capable of seeing beyond his personal wealth. Chernow portrays this very well without leaving out the shadiness of his rise to wealth nor his many critics. Your interpretation of the man is very biased by principles put into practise well after his time.

By stabilizing the oil market he enabled an economy that otherwise could not exist. Oil exploration, production, refining, and marketing was a hit-or-miss affair which resulted in mini booms and busts as field after field was raped by too many small companies which each were capable of undercutting each others' prices, going bust, and leaving an environmental disaster in its wake. John D. and his 'Standard' created a single large 'target' which allowed government a target it would not otherwise have. He did for oil what Bill Gates would later do for operating systems.

As for unions, I'm on the side of the unions of that era. BUT, I'm not foolish enough to expect that John D. would be on their side at the time. After Ludlow, his son John showed some responsibility which again is way more than Henry Ford ever did over some of his activities.

As for Trotsky, he was chased out of Russia and got a hatchet in the head from his fellow Communists. And the Communists never had to bust any unions because they killed anyone who didn't agree with them and made up the reasons later.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Sep 06 - 12:59 PM

even though I do NOT vote thereby being part of the problem, rather than part of the solution.

Do everyone a favor, if only this time around, Vote the Scoundrels Out.

Thanks-

Greg

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: GUEST,sorefingers
Date: 10 Sep 06 - 12:53 PM

Old Guy is completely oblivious of the forces that create such things as the United States and many other FREE societies.

The reason why people organise and fight fascism in not because the want to stop economies, but because they want to be free. Free from abuse, free from discrimination, free from slavery, free from bad stuff etc etc.

The reason the Democrats are 'demonising' Wal-Mart ( your words ) is because they are evil. It's that simple.

It has nothing to do with electing Democrats, more likely it has to do with getting the current rightwing semi-fascists out of office. Now that's something I can support - even though I do NOT vote nor take any interest in politics.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: dianavan
Date: 10 Sep 06 - 12:42 PM

That guy said, "So jobs are bad? Maybe it would be better if these people remained on welfare."

Jobs are good if the wages and benefits are good.

If WalMart was good for the economy of a community, nobody would object.

Some people can't seem to put two and two together.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Sep 06 - 11:50 AM

h yes, Robo- you mean the book "Whitewash":

Titan: The Life of John D Rockefeller, Sr.

By Ron Chernow, Little Brown, 1998, £25
Reviewed by Mike Watkinson

THE US WRITER Mark Twain singled out the 1849 gold rush as 'the watershed event that sanctified a new money worship and debased the country's founding ideals'.

With John D Rockefeller it was nothing so shallow. As a young bookkeeper he was enthralled by a $4,000 banker's draft his employer had received. "I stared at it with open eyes and mouth", he recalled. "Many times during the day did I open the safe to gaze longingly at the note". The author of Titan comments: "In this story, one can almost feel the erotic charge that the banknote aroused in the boy".

Here we have a portrait of the man who through companies such as Standard Oil - dubbed 'The Octopus' - pioneered the forms capitalism adopted in the United States and beyond.

Unfortunately Chernow's book just chronicles the life of JDR. With the subject neither 'demonised or canonised', it pays scant attention to how this individual came to mesh with his times and become an instrument of history.

Rockefeller was lucky on a whole number of scores, firstly, not to get killed in the civil war. He hired a substitute to do his fighting - and presumably his dying. Then his basic start-up capital was handed to him direct by his father, a charlatan medicine-man who sold 'cancer remedies'.

The civil war made JDR. He amassed a fortune in Cleveland trading with the union, and was then perfectly placed to exploit the reconstruction boom, a period a banker described as one when it was "easy to grow rich... (with) economic marauders... too busy making money to be overly concerned with tradition".

In 1863 JRD developed 'a little side issue'- oil refining. Once again he was helped by the fact that oil was first pumped in Titusville, Pennsylvania. The field's compactness, plus JDR's geographical proximity, allowed him to exploit the domestic and export opportunities of kerosene as the heating-and-lighting fuel of the masses.

The by-product, petrol, which only overtook kerosene sales in 1910, was actually thrown into the river such that the waters of the Cuyahoga burst into flames whenever ships dropped hot coals overboard. Cleveland itself became so polluted that Rockefeller's effluent "tainted the beer and soured the milk".
        
Trotsky wrote that the worst thing about capitalism was not the obscene wealth and privileges of the rich, but that to retain them they plunge everyone else into periodic penury. JDR was the personification of this. While he ultimately donated millions to recipients and projects he deemed to be deserving, in the words of a Rockefeller critic Chernow quotes, this merely helped to 'fumigate his fortune'.

He took a harsh and uncompromising line against unions, and many working class families threatened unruly children with the 'bogeyman Rockefeller'. He was also prepared to bribe whoever it took, from state legislators to federal senators. He formed trusts, preferring 'co-operation' to deal with the 'chaotic conditions' engendered by the business cycle. Long before the oil-producers' cartel OPEC, he was restricting oil production, buying up and closing down rivals, or having companies compete for a contract, only to discover that the 'Octopus' owned both!

As Chernow comments, "after the civil war, the most significant revolt against free-market capitalism came not from reformers or zealous ideologues but from businessmen who couldn't control the maddening fluctuations of the market place... Rockefeller and other industrial captains conspired to kill off competitive capitalism in favour of a new monopoly capitalism". Rockefeller "sounded more like Karl Marx" when he rounded on the vagaries of the business cycle - naturally he wanted to see it tamed not for the general good but for his 'general good'.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: robomatic
Date: 10 Sep 06 - 03:26 AM

Re: John D. Read the Book Titan.

There were plenty of folks who did (and do) meet the requirements of the term 'malefactors of great wealth'. Many of them had no good side to counteract the bad. John D. most certainly contributed greatly to the progress of this nation and the well-being of its citizens. It was not, however, a good idea to go into business against him.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Old Guy
Date: 10 Sep 06 - 12:10 AM

Yes DF, I agree the minimum wage should be $10 or more per hour. Trickle up economics will improve the economy.

And it does not target anybody or any company.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Old Guy
Date: 10 Sep 06 - 12:03 AM

So jobs are bad? Maybe it would be better if these people remained on welfare.

And are all Wallmarts in areas where there is no other place to work?

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Don Firth
Date: 09 Sep 06 - 11:29 PM

Unless, of course, that's the only choice they have, which, in some communities, that is the case.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Old Guy
Date: 09 Sep 06 - 11:25 PM

Kat: My post stems from the thread about how the Democrats are trying to demonize Walmart to get elected.

And then the Dems are aghast that Walmart contributes more to the Republican party than they donate to the Democratic party.

I wonder why? Maybe it's a shakedown.

Anyway it Walmart was so bad, no one would work there and no one would shop there which would solve the problem.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Don Firth
Date: 09 Sep 06 - 06:10 PM

Even Henry Ford had enough brains to pay his employees well:   $5.00 a day, which was damned high wages at the time. Other industrialists had a fit when he did this—thought he was setting a horrible precedent—but Ford was smart enough to want his employees to have enough money to be able to buy the cars they were building.

Gotta hand it to Hank F. He might have been a pluperfect SOB, but he was anything but stupid. Would that the same could be said for many of the CEOs kicking around now.

For several reasons, paying good wages is just good business.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Sep 06 - 05:53 PM

As to you who wish to trash John D., you sound like a bunch of sore losers, too.

Facts = "Trashing"? You're starting to sound like Rove.

In your campaign to canonize one of those that Theodore Roosevelt (no bleeding heart leftie, he!) accurately labelled "Malefactors of great wealth" have you actually read Tarbell or Lloyd? Or a modern biography of o'l beatified John D.?

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: dianavan
Date: 09 Sep 06 - 04:49 PM

Does it really matter if you have control of U.K. waters?

If you want to save the fish, all water must be protected to encourage the sustainability of the fisheries. This is for the good of all of us. Its better to work toward a common goal than to splinter into national, short term economic policies.

Whats the point of protecting a national fishery if another country decides to drag the bottom of the sea for anything and everything just offshore?

I doubt if WalMart has anything but their own short-term profit in mind.

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: katlaughing
Date: 09 Sep 06 - 03:03 PM

Old Guy, you building a resume in order to apply for a PR job with Wal Mart?:-)

Subject: RE: BS: A good side of Wal-Mart?
From: robomatic
Date: 09 Sep 06 - 02:21 PM

GUEST you took the words out of my mouth in responding to soreloser/head/fingers.

As to you who wish to trash John D., you sound like a bunch of sore losers, too.

If you want to get really sore at someone, a better target would be Henry Ford, unless you fell for his brand of anti-union/ anti-semitism. There's a world of difference between Henry Ford and John D. Rockefeller.

The world that gave us Ida Tarbell gave us Ivy Lee, and vice versa.