? - K-Mart filled Chapter 7 and now owns Sears...

[aneekr]

I made no claims about percentages or situation post bankruptcy, only that K-Mart had unions prior to the bankruptcy, which is so.

Point taken. I read your statement about K-Mart in the present tense- my fault.

 

You've chery picked your end point... severely... using a shorter OR longer period Walmart beats the S&P (at least in the way I think you are comparing). That's academically dishonest.

All figures presented in my previous post are 5 year averages, gleaned from Reuters. And I stand corrected on the S&P 500 net profit margin for that period; it is 12.27%, not 12.17%.

 

Neither the 5 year avg. nor the TTM profitability ratios for WMT support the contention that it is "super profitable." (In the interest of full disclosure, I hold about 600 shares in WMT plus a combination of call and put options on it along debt and equity securities for scores of other companies in other sectors).

 

To wildly differing degrees, which I'm willing to wager correlate with current profitability (i.e. lower unionization = higher current profitability / lower net losses). Or do you doubt that?

I do harbor some doubts, both on the claim "wildly differing degrees [of unionization]" itself as well as the purported correlation. Nonetheless, it makes no sense for me to aver a conclusion either negative or affirmative because I don't have the data to perform a regression analysis on this.

 

I'm pretty sure that the most profitable automotive group currently is Porsche Automobil Holding SE, which does have significant union representation among employees on both the Porsche AG and VW AG sides (IG Metall, Central Única dos Trabalhadores, Sindicato Independiente de la VW, etc.)

 

Anyway, I'll wait until there's data that either corroborates or refutes this statement before commenting further on it. Or better yet, until someone else does the regression analysis and presents it on BON.

[RichardJensen]

HeavyAaron, Critic:

 

You need to depersonalize this debate. Aneekr & OFW should be your examples.

[Critic]

HeavyAaron, Critic:

 

You need to depersonalize this debate. Aneekr & OFW should be your examples.

OFW=? And no reply is necessary really.

 

Anyways, I agree. Lot of tension in all of this for me. I mean to others this is just a show to watch. Maybe they make a purchase every few years. To me, it's my job personally. 10,000 people just permanently lost jobs today. That's 10,000 families. GONE I bleed for them.

[Noah Harbinger]

Your trying to tell me what to write on here? Your actually censoring me Mr. university economist? one who's daddy paid for his education.. you should be very worried your kids and grand-kids aren't moving back in with you MR.

 

Most so-called "Right-To-Work" supporters don't come from the Ivory Tower (where even the TAs are members of the UAW), they tend to come from trailer parks.... where it's not a surprise when the kids and grand-kids live at "home".

[RichardJensen]

OFW=? And no reply is necessary really.

Old Fairmont Wagon

[grbeck]

Most so-called "Right-To-Work" supporters don't come from the Ivory Tower (where even the TAs are members of the UAW), they tend to come from trailer parks.... where it's not a surprise when the kids and grand-kids live at "home".

 

Stereotypes are never attractive, regardless of which party expresses them.

Edited May 1, 2009 by grbeck

[HeavyAaron]

All figures presented in my previous post are 5 year averages, gleaned from Reuters. And I stand corrected on the S&P 500 net profit margin for that period; it is 12.27%, not 12.17%.

 

Neither the 5 year avg. nor the TTM profitability ratios for WMT support the contention that it is "super profitable." (In the interest of full disclosure, I hold about 600 shares in WMT plus a combination of call and put options on it along debt and equity securities for scores of other companies in other sectors).

 

Now I see exactly where you're getting your data. You're using "Net Profit Margin". Well, that's a very silly measure of "profitability". That's profit as a portion of revenue. Of course Walmart is going to be very, VERY, SUPER low by that measure. Their whole business plan is to operate on very low margins. What you want to look at instead is profit as a return on assets. I had assumed that you had cherry picked your end point as I knew that in over the past couple of years Walmart showed a positive where the S&P was negative. And over the past couple of decades, well, Walmart was a superstar. Well... looking at the proper data in your own citation, even for the 5 year period you chose (which is still the worse posible time frame for comparison for Walmart) Walmart still beats the S&P and slaughters the industry. It is a super profitable firm. I stand by my assertion.

[HeavyAaron]

currently is Porsche Automobil Holding SE, which does have significant union representation among employees on both the Porsche AG and VW AG sides (IG Metall, Central Única dos Trabalhadores, Sindicato Independiente de la VW, etc.)

 

Anyway, I'll wait until there's data that either corroborates or refutes this statement before commenting further on it. Or better yet, until someone else does the regression analysis and presents it on BON.

 

I've tried to put together the data required to perform the regression analysis. However, I cannot find a comprehensive database of comparitive unionization rates of the automotive firms. I don't want to use data from disparit sources since if they differed in their methods it would effect the results.

 

If anyone has a suggested source, I would appreciate it. I'm always happy to put a hypothesis to the test.

Edited May 1, 2009 by HeavyAaron

[HeavyAaron]

Get off your anti-union kick. You can try to belittle me, because I might show a working man's point of view, but suddenly when your shown some numbers you swiftly try to retract

 

I have never belittled you. And I have not retracted anything save the correction on SWA.

 

and then at the end You want to disregard that the same companies that have unions overseas do what they can here to keep them out of their plants here, as a battle plan.

 

I respect companies that fight cartels, sure. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. I'm sure they would love to get rid of any of their unionized labor if they could.

 

Do you understand the world of people that actually WORK? Your the only one ENTITLED to how you say a Very well compensated living?

 

As a person who works, sure. Surely you aren't claiming that only phyical labor counts as work? (unless you mean Work = Force * displacement... sorry physics joke)

 

NO ONE, myself included, is entited to any degree of living standard. That's socialist nonsense. One's time is compensated at the going market rate, or at least it should be.

 

In other words: willing to wager with current bias-ability, you just don't like unions or the word union.

 

I don't understand your assertion. I can't parse your sentence for sematic meaning.

 

And I didn't need a list of unionized industries. I'm aware of them.

 

That's what gets me, You will clamor for someones wages to be cut

 

False assertion. Now it's true that I believe that unions should be once again outlawed under the Sherman anti-trust law along with other forms of cartel price fixing as was once the case. And as a consequence any overpaid unionized employees would see a drop in pay, sure.

 

that you know what they make, BUT you will not divulge anything of your own, because you could be picked apart by others,

 

Considering how personal you like to make things, and that you're willing to threaten others on this board with physical violence (say, like in this thread: http://www.blueovalforums.com/forums/index...32121&st=0) I think keeping my anonymity with you is wise. Your Christian virtues are perhaps suspect, so I don't trust you.

 

You've actually suggested your better than someone that does physical labor.

 

False assertion.

 

THOUGHT you were history in this thread, but you just don't want people to dislike you. Right?

 

That would be one thing. But you keep slandering instead. That's something else.

 

But you can show contempt for an autoworker.

 

False assertion. That's a lot of assertions in one post you've made about me that just aren't true. Maybe you have a picture of who I am in your mind? I don't know. But in the future if you're going to assert that I take a particular position cite it or at least try to be accurate. I don't appreciate it when you assert that I state things that I don't.

 

Look, I thought we went through this before. I'll try again. You obviously have a personal problem with me. I've never replied to you unless you first replied to me. And you LOVE to reply to me it seems, and make it personal. I don't know who you are and I don't want to. I don't mind a fair above board debate on issues. I don't try to make things personal. I don't take things personally. Let's try to both do better?

[Critic]

I popped into this thread, just to see what you might have said Aaron, It's almost one complete page worth that I refuse to even look at. As If you haven't noticed and I know you did, I dropped talking to you about it.

 

Whatever you have to say to me,.... just talk to the hand. I'm done with you. Take your arguements to some place else. I think you've taken this topic off-topic far enough.

 

And go look up the defination for Slander, good luck with that one pal.

 

I've called for the moderators to see this as a personal attack now.

Edited May 1, 2009 by Critic

[HeavyAaron]

And go look up the defination for Slander, good luck with that one pal.

 

"Slander:

a malicious, false, and defamatory statement or report: a slander against his good name."

 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/slander

 

Yeah, that's a knee slapper... *scratches head*

[Critic]

I have never belittled you. And I have not retracted anything save the correction on SWA.

 

 

 

I respect companies that fight cartels, sure. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. I'm sure they would love to get rid of any of their unionized labor if they could.

 

 

 

As a person who works, sure. Surely you aren't claiming that only phyical labor counts as work? (unless you mean Work = Force * displacement... sorry physics joke)

 

NO ONE, myself included, is entited to any degree of living standard. That's socialist nonsense. One's time is compensated at the going market rate, or at least it should be.

 

 

 

I don't understand your assertion. I can't parse your sentence for sematic meaning.

 

And I didn't need a list of unionized industries. I'm aware of them.

 

 

 

False assertion. Now it's true that I believe that unions should be once again outlawed under the Sherman anti-trust law along with other forms of cartel price fixing as was once the case. And as a consequence any overpaid unionized employees would see a drop in pay, sure.

 

 

 

Considering how personal you like to make things, and that you're willing to threaten others on this board with physical violence (say, like in this thread: http://www.blueovalforums.com/forums/index...32121&st=0) I think keeping my anonymity with you is wise. Your Christian virtues are perhaps suspect, so I don't trust you.

 

 

 

False assertion.

 

 

 

That would be one thing. But you keep slandering instead. That's something else.

 

 

 

False assertion. That's a lot of assertions in one post you've made about me that just aren't true. Maybe you have a picture of who I am in your mind? I don't know. But in the future if you're going to assert that I take a particular position cite it or at least try to be accurate. I don't appreciate it when you assert that I state things that I don't.

 

Look, I thought we went through this before. I'll try again. You obviously have a personal problem with me. I've never replied to you unless you first replied to me. And you LOVE to reply to me it seems, and make it personal. I don't know who you are and I don't want to. I don't mind a fair above board debate on issues. I don't try to make things personal. I don't take things personally. Let's try to both do better?

just so it doesn't get altered

[Critic]

HeavyAaron, Critic:

 

You need to depersonalize this debate. Aneekr & OFW should be your examples.

 

 

cough cough

[macattak1]

WOW!

 

Critic Said-

"Don't give me bullshit about I'll spend my money where I want. I see you buying a toyoda, I know your trying to put me out of a job and you don't give a fuck about me. I see you buy that toyoda I know you don't even give a fuck about where you next damn paycheck comes from. I see you buy that toyoda, you better keep a damn close eye on it, because I'll try to make you wish you had never driven it to work. You better hide the damn thing at home

 

So think really really hard where you spend your money pal, were in this together, Your either with me or your against me, and when you come between me and my pocket book, then you will have a battle on your hands. You just hire in and drive that toyoda, your next car had better be a Ford, Got it? And you'd better get a FORD pretty damn quick if you want to keep driving to work too."

 

Critic Said-

"Times are getting tough, keep your eye open. Industrial accidents do happen. Tires pick up nails all the time, Door dings sure look bad, even scratches from grocery store bask-carts. keep your eye over one shoulder. You never know exactly who I am now do you?

 

I don't care if it's UNION made or not. I see a non-ford parked next to me, I like to open my door wide to get into my lovely old truck that can take a licking and keep on tickin.

 

pussy! You can run to labor all you want, and the rest of your I'll own whatever I want fuckwads take it to heart too. Your either with the people who want to stay employed or your against us. Time you get with the program pal. No one within the union is going to hold your hand child."

 

I mean just WOW

 

And to think that I was actually concerned that I might have said something inappropriate in the Employee section where Critic said he put me on ignore.

 

DSMIV

 

Peace and Blessings

[Critic]

Yep I said and meant every word of that in the employee section, and that's just what it is Mac. the employee section.

 

And I also have the option to click to see what you do say while your on ignore if you didn't figure that out

 

And you can go and read anytime you want in their. It's pretty much a free-for all. The only section on this site. Lot of people do that. it's for employee's only to post. I can't help it that you've never seen language like that before. If you don't want to see it, don't go in there. PERIOD

 

Now you come in their and post and you will also get an earful. But outside of there, this is a different story.

 

Your basically still on ignore, ain't gonna change.

Edited May 1, 2009 by Critic