C2C now just for extreme right wing

[stevesh]

I guess my question is: who is this business model excellent for?

Walmart shareholders, which is the purpose of a public corporation.

I don't really want to get into a pissing match with a guy whose posts I enjoy and whose opinions I respect, but when your source authorities are dailykos.com, huffingtonppost.com and goodjobsfirst.com, which despite all the buzz words and dog whistles on their websites is just another tired anti-business, pro-union shill, it doesn't seem you have much real information to work with.

[onan]

Walmart shareholders, which is the purpose of a public corporation.

I don't really want to get into a pissing match with a guy whose posts I enjoy and whose opinions I respect, but when your source authorities are dailykos.com, huffingtonppost.com and goodjobsfirst.com, which despite all the buzz words and dog whistles on their websites is just another tired anti-business, pro-union shill, it doesn't seem you have much real information to work with.

Fair enough. I don't want to get into a pissing contest either. I could dig deeper, I know the info is out there. I know most of what was posted is as close to fact as one can get with all the parsing. I get lazy too and honestly as we both know opinions rarely change.


To add, I would like someday to have a serious discussion about investments, shareholders, and the implications to the economy they are within.

[PB the Deplorable]

I believe WalMart buys more goods from China than any other business - by far.  I think a very significant percentage of the foreign goods sold in the US are sold by WalMart.   If we want to bring some of our manufacturing jobs back home, they would be the main obstacle in the private sector.   

We've managed to export much of our inflation for the past couple of decades, so bringing these jobs back would cost us considerably more at the cash register, but there would also be significant benefits to having these jobs back home (like lower unemployment - leading to higher wages, a larger tax base, etc).

[onan]

I believe WalMart buys more goods from China than any other business - by far.  I think a very significant percentage of the foreign goods sold in the US are sold by WalMart.   If we want to bring some of our manufacturing jobs back home, they would be the main obstacle in the private sector.   

We've managed to export much of our inflation for the past couple of decades, so bringing these jobs back would cost us considerably more at the cash register, but there would also be significant benefits to having these jobs back home (like lower unemployment - leading to higher wages, a larger tax base, etc).

I completely agree with this. And yes it would make things more expensive... but that is kind of a pay me now or pay me later situation.

[stevesh]

To add, I would like someday to have a serious discussion about investments, shareholders, and the implications to the economy they are within.

Me, too. As a nearly-fanatical believer in 'the market' I'll be interested to see the differences in our approaches.

[stevesh]

I believe WalMart buys more goods from China than any other business - by far.  I think a very significant percentage of the foreign goods sold in the US are sold by WalMart.   If we want to bring some of our manufacturing jobs back home, they would be the main obstacle in the private sector.   

We've managed to export much of our inflation for the past couple of decades, so bringing these jobs back would cost us considerably more at the cash register, but there would also be significant benefits to having these jobs back home (like lower unemployment - leading to higher wages, a larger tax base, etc).

I also agree, and would be willing to pay any reasonable difference in prices. Now all we need to do is convince 200 million Walmart shoppers.

[West of the Rockies]

Walmart shareholders, which is the purpose of a public corporation.

I don't really want to get into a pissing match with a guy whose posts I enjoy and whose opinions I respect, but when your source authorities are dailykos.com, huffingtonppost.com and goodjobsfirst.com, which despite all the buzz words and dog whistles on their websites is just another tired anti-business, pro-union shill, it doesn't seem you have much real information to work with.

My comment is not about Walmart here, but about how we all doubt each other's sources.  SteveSh, you obviously don't accept Onan's sources as credible.  It is the same when I see someone using "evidence" from RedState, the Drudge Report, Breitbart, FoxNEWS, etc. 

And yet no one seems to agree that there is a truly non-partisan source.  I suggest NPR or PBS, someone will immediately cry out, "Oh, those are terrible leftwing sources!"  Someone says, "Well, I always trust The Wallstreet Journal," and someone will point out that this newspaper is now owned by Rupert Murdoch's holdings.

It is a conundrum....

[stevesh]

My comment is not about Walmart here, but about how we all doubt each other's sources.  SteveSh, you obviously don't accept Onan's sources as credible.  It is the same when I see someone using "evidence" from RedState, the Drudge Report, Breitbart, FoxNEWS, etc. 

And yet no one seems to agree that there is a truly non-partisan source.  I suggest NPR or PBS, someone will immediately cry out, "Oh, those are terrible leftwing sources!"  Someone says, "Well, I always trust The Wallstreet Journal," and someone will point out that this newspaper is now owned by Rupert Murdoch's holdings.

It is a conundrum....

Agreed. There isn't really any unbiased source of information that I can think of. Most of us just turn to those sources that most echo our own beliefs. (And yes, I consider both PBS and NPR to be extreme left wing mouthpieces.)

I was thinking the other day that maybe there might be a role here for the rapidly-disappearing newspapers. They could re-configure themselves as rigidly unbiased sources of fact and reportage, akin to Heinlein's Fair Witnesses. Might be impossible, though, given human nature.

[NowhereInTime]

Agreed. There isn't really any unbiased source of information that I can think of. Most of us just turn to those sources that most echo our own beliefs. (And yes, I consider both PBS and NPR to be extreme left wing mouthpieces.)

I was thinking the other day that maybe there might be a role here for the rapidly-disappearing newspapers. They could re-configure themselves as rigidly unbiased sources of fact and reportage, akin to Heinlein's Fair Witnesses. Might be impossible, though, given human nature.

I actually accept, and have used, The Wall Street Journal (Rupert Murdoch) and Forbes magazine (Steve Forbes) as sources `to substantiate points made here.  I feel that, ed page aside, the Journal is a damn fine paper - nearly as good as the Grey Lady herself.  And the more formal newsmagazines like Money, Forbes, the Atlantic, Time, the Economist, etc may be across the board politically but the journalism is usually good.

[PB the Deplorable]

My comment is not about Walmart here, but about how we all doubt each other's sources.  SteveSh, you obviously don't accept Onan's sources as credible.  It is the same when I see someone using "evidence" from RedState, the Drudge Report, Breitbart, FoxNEWS, etc. 

And yet no one seems to agree that there is a truly non-partisan source.  I suggest NPR or PBS, someone will immediately cry out, "Oh, those are terrible leftwing sources!"  Someone says, "Well, I always trust The Wallstreet Journal," and someone will point out that this newspaper is now owned by Rupert Murdoch's holdings.

It is a conundrum....

Over time as events unfold, one can look back and see who turned out to be lying, or whose predictions or opinions turned out to be correct, or who put out a fact that turned out to be important and who covered it up. 

But people interpret what is happening differently as those events unfold. 

The relative importance of each instance is different for everyone.

World views, perspectives, and experiences are different 


To muddy things more, one 'side' never gets everything right 100% of the time.

And we all probably sift through the news filtering it to a certain extent to find validity for our points of view, as opposed to taking a fresh look at things as often as we should

[West of the Rockies]

You make some good points here, Paperboy... But then we have to consider how "revisionist history" further muddies the water.  To offer one example, there are those who sstill see McCartheyism is evil; there are those who now say the junior senator from Wisconsin was railroaded and made a scape goat. 

[bmcintyre]

01/2012

In the first half of the program, ghostbuster Mary Ann Winkowski talked about her cookbook of recipes from the dead, Beyond Delicious. She said spirits began giving her recipes from the other side about 30 years ago, when she was clearing the house of a woman who had been baking a nut roll. According to Winkowski, a ghost in the home told her, "They may smell good, but they are terrible. [The owner] makes a horrible nut roll." The spirit then offered her own nut roll recipe, Winkowski added. In another case, she recalled a homeowner lamenting that her aunt passed away before sharing a recipe for gum drop cookies. A ghost in that house offered to summon the departed aunt so she could give her living niece the recipe, Winkowski revealed. Male ghosts are even more insistent about passing on their recipes for steak and barbecue, she noted.
Some of these spirits did not cross over because they felt guilty for never properly passing on their recipes, Winkowski continued. Those interested in getting a special recipe from a departed loved one can ask for it the next time they dream about that person, she suggested. Winkowski also spoke about scary earthbound spirits that can come into homes through energy openings called portals. Unlike ghosts that use the front door to enter a dwelling, spirits that come through portals typically have bad attitudes and cause problems for the residents, she explained. In life they were likely victims of murder or suicide, drug addicts, prisoners, pedophiles, or rapists, she said. The one positive with such spirits is that they can only stay for a day or two, Winkowski noted. She pointed out that portals are actually blown open by the living, and any house were a murder or suicide has taken place probably has one. Winkowski recommended smudging with sage to keep portal spirits at bay.

[bmcintyre]

Mysterious Universe gets a lot of the same guests that George gets but unlike George, the interviewers, the two guys are more interactive with the guests. 

With Mary Ellen Guiles, who sounds about 100 years old, they discussed shadow people who became shadow husbands and wives to the living.  And, apparently there is a difference between having sex with a shadow wife and a wet dream wr2 ejaculation.  Yes, she did go there but it was all for the sake of Jinns and Shadow People Subject Matter Expertise.  I was very amused!  I guess its not just shadow men with black hats living out of the corner of your eye anymore!!

[Juan]

I suggest NPR or PBS, someone will immediately cry out, "Oh, those are terrible leftwing sources!" 

I know some fine people at NPR and PBS - the trouble with them is that many, if not most, of their original reporting is paid for by grants.  The grant writers don't tell the reporters how to write the story, but they do structure the story by the way the grant is written.  Of course, we all know the shortcomings of the commercial media.

[bmcintyre]

Linda Morton Howell.  How many animals have been disfigured or killed just to get a few pesos from LMH?  I can do a great imitation of LMH. 

[Tinfoil Hat]

<snip>

With Mary Ellen Guiles, who sounds about 100 years old, they discussed shadow people who became shadow husbands and wives to the living. 
<snip>

Every time I hear Mary Ellen Guiles, I always imagine her with a non-filtered Camel cigarette in one hand and a pint of Old Crow whiskey in the other.

[bmcintyre]

Its hard of Mary E. Guiles.  What' :'(s a girl to do?

[Jackpine Savage]

Fair enough. I don't want to get into a pissing contest either. I could dig deeper, I know the info is out there. I know most of what was posted is as close to fact as one can get with all the parsing. I get lazy too and honestly as we both know opinions rarely change.


To add, I would like someday to have a serious discussion about investments, shareholders, and the implications to the economy they are within.

Henry Ford wrote some books about this exact topic. He realized that a dollar spent within one's market had a multiplicative effect. Corporations have a duty to not only shareholders, but also consumers and employees. We all live and work and play in the same geospace, it makes sense not to shit in it. Now I don't think the government can compel such responsibility, for when they get involved it invariably turns into "too bid to fail". Rather, companies should be encouraged to take the long view. We all want to raise kids and see them birth grandchildren. This takes longer than a quarter earnings period.