General Question

bolwerk's avatar

What is the worst company on the planet?

Asked by bolwerk (10312points) June 20th, 2010

Okay, so, we all know government is full of asshats. But increasingly, states are becoming less relevant as large, fascistic multinationals take over, moving capital and resources across borders as easily as gas passes through Rush Limbaugh’s cheeks. News Corporation? Time-Warner? BP? Other petroleum companies? Johnson & Johnson? Pfizer? Chick Publications? Microsoft? Apple? Google? What would you say is the worst company on the planet? Why?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

93 Answers

gorillapaws's avatar

De Beers is right up there.

dpworkin's avatar

United Fruit Company (now Chiquita Brands) hands down. They have blood up to their elbows.

janbb's avatar

Right now, BP has to be the top candidate for that award.

Lightlyseared's avatar

In the employee happiness stakes – Foxconn.

MissAnthrope's avatar

In the customer service area, Delta.

James_Mal's avatar

It’s a tie. Between almost every large corp on this planet. I agree with @Lightlyseared though… Foxconn is pretty bad when it comes to happiness!

Lightlyseared's avatar

@janbb If BP were the worst company in the world the clever people at the US government wouldn’t have tasked them with the important job of cleaning up the worst ecological disaster ever.

filmfann's avatar

@Lightlyseared That they created.

Lightlyseared's avatar

@filmfann that they created… yes… good point.. well made.

bootonthroat's avatar

The Federal Reserve

jaytkay's avatar

Depends on the definition of “worst”, but News Corp and Xe Services (AKA Blackwater) belong somewhere on the list.

janbb's avatar

I’d like to nominate Halliburton for runner-up.

Nullo's avatar

Mom & Pop’s Grocery Stop. :D

Fannie Mae, perhaps.

anartist's avatar

@jaytkay @janbb CACI’d be in that batch too.

rebbel's avatar

I don’t remember the name of the company or the family who runs it, but i saw a documentary about a sugar(canes) company a while ago and they were really exploiting their workers.
Bad pay, bad conditions, no union.
The family is, i believe, in the top lists of moneymakers in the world.

JLeslie's avatar

@janbb I have to wonder if other oil companies have the same set-up as BP? Follow the same standards, etc. BP just got unlucky that their rig failed before the others.

janbb's avatar

Well, I don’t have sources to quote but I did hear on NPR that there are several safety violation suits against BP already pending in the courts. Which is not to say that the others are not guilty of shortcuts as well. I do know that when all the major companies testified before the Congressional hearings last week, none of them had a concrete plan for how to deal with a blowout on a deepwater well. Yeah – hang them all!

JLeslie's avatar

I think it is a case of they never really thought something like this could go wrong. It is irresponsible no doubt, but I don’t think they were purposely viscious. I am not as negative about the company, but of course I am horrifed by the oil spilling into our gulf everyday. Makes me sick.

TooBlue's avatar

McDonalds for sure.

anartist's avatar

E Systems.

janbb's avatar

@JLeslie They took shortcuts, they didn’t listen to warnings they received from their own engineers, they have not allowed the media access to the site…....

There was a story on NPR about how BP has prevented journalists from exploring the story. BP has hired all the commercial fishing and tourist boats in the area to stay idle so that journalists cannot get close to the site. They have instructed sherrifs to escort journalists off beaches so they cannot get photos of the destruction.

Sorry but the more I hear the angrier I get. “Have you no decency, sir?”

HungryGuy's avatar

AT&T (no offense, filmfann :-)

Anon_Jihad's avatar

I’ve always had a deep deep hatred for Dupont. We’d be much farther along in industrial advancements, and I dare even say not this deep in debt as a nation if it weren’t for some of their dealings.

Berserker's avatar

MacDicks, it’s pure evil.

HungryGuy's avatar

Is it any worse than Booger King?

Berserker's avatar

Actually I’ve heard that MacDonald’s offers a great deal of money to associations which deal with children with cancer. So that’s good. I was just being pretty random, although MacDicks does have its share of atrocities…what has BK done for humanity lately? besides perpetuate cow holocaust like its brethren.
Charity or not though, I just can’t stand some of those megalomaniac fast food chains.

A&W; for the fucking win.

Lightlyseared's avatar

I’d suggest Starbucks is more evil than MacDonald’s.

rangerr's avatar

BP. For obvious reasons. And they are handing it like a bunch of babies.
Followed by the entire meat industry. Also for obvious reasons.
Now if you’re talking about worst for the environment, then my answer would have a few more on the list.

bootonthroat's avatar

@HungryGuy I love Burger King. What could be wrong with them?

SmashTheState's avatar

Nestle blows away all the competition. Nestle kills babies. According to the WHO, Nestle’s marketing techniques are responsible for the death of 1.5 million babies every single year. And they’ve been doing it for 20+ years.

What Nestle does is bribe doctors in the developing world to give samples of Nestle baby formula to new mothers. The doctors make very little, so they’re easy to bribe. The samples of baby formula are designed to last just long enough for the mother’s breasts to dry up. If she can’t afford more formula, or if she has no access to clean drinking water, the baby dies. There has been a worldwide boycott of Nestle for more than 20 years as a result of this, but apparently the profit Nestle makes from this tactic is more than what they lose from the boycott.

Nestle kills babies. For profit. Remember that the next time you reach for a Kit Kat.

laureth's avatar

No Wal*Mart yet? I’m shocked. Shocked, I say!

jazmina88's avatar

on the oil wagon here….BP ruins the gulf shores in one big blow
and the oil keepin on plummeting 2 months later

LuckyGuy's avatar

Halliburton. No morals whatsoever.

JLeslie's avatar

@janbb All the things you mention are awful, I agree. I just think there are corporations all over America and the world that suck just as bad. Not trying to talk you out of your choice though, certainly there is a lot of reason to be hating BP right now.

MarthaStewart's avatar

The worst company I’ve ever dealt with directly is TigerDirect. They have great looking ads, but terrible service and deceptive practices. If you buy something that seems to be $20, you will pay $60 and you will be told to expect $40 in rebates. But they will never ever come, and when you complain they will lie to you about them being late or not received. Even when you show your certified mail receipt they will continue to lie saying “that rebate is no longer available.”

DarlingRhadamanthus's avatar

I think any of the Big Pharmas….the pharmaceutical companies that push their drugs and are trying to outlaw natural vitamins and herbs…so that we become a nation of drug addicts.

And the one that gets to me even more than Big Pharma? Monsanto—that is genetically modifying seeds so that we cannot grow our own fruits and vegetables…and also are poisoning the planet and our food sources in the process. That one company is toying with our lives, with the plant kingdom and damaging our DNA through the process…they are basically making us ill…so that they can line their pockets. Monsanto is playing God with our lives.

THEY ARE DESPICABLE.

Nullo's avatar

I have a dry, prickly spot in my heart for all the payday and title loan places out there. They’re individually quite small, but there are a whole heckuvalot of them.

For the uninitiated, these are places that will loan you money, either in exchange for your next paycheck or against the title to your car or house, and the interest rates are insanely high. People who really, really need money go there, and they generally lose.

gorillapaws's avatar

@DarlingRhadamanthus do you realize that most of those all natural and herbal cures are all owned by big pharma? Personally, I’m glad they’re researching new treatments for diseases. Vitamins and herbs are great, but when it comes to treating most serious ailments, I think I’ll stick to the medicines that have been scientifically proven to be effective.

My biggest beef with them is that they spend a ton of money marketing and selling their products that could otherwise be going to fund more research.

Anon_Jihad's avatar

Actually considering how directly responsible Dupont for many of the thousands upon thousands of Americans in jail, I definitely put them far beyond all others as the worst company ever. Greedy fucks.

shpadoinkle_sue's avatar

Um…Blackwater?
I really hate AT&T and all their authorized dealers. I wish I could afford not to shop at Wal-Wart. BP is an superior asshat, as well. I don’t trust banks.

talljasperman's avatar

rogers communications in Canada… its so hard to get customer service

Dr_C's avatar

Newscorp (any CEO that allows Glen Beck to remain on the air deserves to be dragged out into the street and shot), Halliburton and Fluther.
Ok maybe not Fluther… But I just had to mention it. not sure why

Nullo's avatar

@Dr_C Whatever else you might think about him, Beck is good for ratings. Ratings mean more valuable ad time mean more profit for the company. Making money isn’t bad.

filmfann's avatar

@Nullo All money ain’t good money.

Nullo's avatar

@filmfann While that is true, I see nothing wrong with money generated by relatively wholesome radio entertainment/news. Sure, it’s no Adventures in Odyssey, but it’s better than Howard Stern.

Dr_C's avatar

@Nullo they are keeping him on the air even though all of his sponsors pulled their ads. Rupert Murdoch is keeping him on the air because he shares his views. There is no profit coming in from that show.

anartist's avatar

COMCAST sucks. They market to you one-on-one. They won’t talk to you about cost for TV service unless you give them your complete address. A city is not enough. A neighborhood is not enough. They try to squeeze each TV-only user as much as possible to drive them to accept phone and inet. Two people next door to each other may pay diferent prices for same service. From a chat:

Moses: How may I help you today?
anne: need simple straightforward pricing for when specials end
Moses: I am happy to help you with that.
Moses: In order to locate the best promotions in your area, May I please have the complete address where you will be establishing service?
a: just digital tv
a: washington dc 20003
a: not promotions, my promotion is ending
a: why is there no list of standard prices, just hustle about bundling
Moses: To assist you further, May I have your complete address?
a: why?
a: this implies comcast has no standard pricing
Moses: I apologize , I am unable to pull up the information without your complete address.
a: why?
Moses: I am unable to pull up the information without your complete address.
a: are you a human being i am talking to
Moses: Yes, Prices varies by market .
a: a market of one?
a: I gave you my neighborhood zip
Moses: I apologize , I am unable to pull up the information without your complete address.
a: i really want to know WHY
a: do you know why?
Moses: Prices and Availability of service may vary by address. So i need you complete address.
a: I find this very disturbing. This is why I don’t like comcast and would never accept a bundle from you.
Moses: Is there any apartment or unit number?
a: it means someone next door or two floors up can cut a better deal, that all is fluid and based on what??? Marketing research of an individual
Moses: May I know what are the services currently you have with Comcast?
a: would like to know how to address a complaint
a: not about you, but about comcast policy
a: some special or other re basic digital
Moses: May I know what are the services currently you have with Comcast?
a: and i do want a contact name as well
a: i just told you

Nullo's avatar

@Dr_C His sponsors only pulled their ads because they were being harassed by people like yourself. Doubtless, Fox hopes to find new sponsors in time.

SmashTheState's avatar

I really have to wonder at some people’s priorities. “I get bad service” apparently trumps “kills 1,500,000 unimportant brown babies somewhere I don’t care about every single year.”

anartist's avatar

@SmashTheState Get real. This question is about any reason whatsoever you don’t like a company. Bad service doesn’t “trump” murder and exploitation and deadly greed, it is a different kind of “don’t like”

Mat74UK's avatar

Union Carbide and the Dow Chemical Company.

bolwerk's avatar

@anartist: I thought it was pretty clear “What is the worst company?” actually referred to something a little more socially important, and if the question didn’t make that clear, the description should have. It was about the corporation and its effect on society as a player in political affairs.

Anyway, I consider crappy service to be so widespread it should be considered mundane. Baby killing, destroying massive bodies of water, privacy violations, spying, and wholesale murder all seem slightly worse than oh noes my ipod is teh broken and Steve Jobs wont fix it gheyy!!!!111!!!1!

Dr_C's avatar

@Nullo care to explain “people like yourself”? I have better things to do with my time than to waste it on calling companies that waste their money on that show.

And Fox’s hope to find new sponsors not withstanding the point remains that the show has none and is losing money. Not a smart business model regardless of your views.

JLeslie's avatar

@anartist I hate that bullshit run around also. It would not be the worst company on the planet for me, but I feel your pain and frustration. I’m sick of it. Sick of it from Comcast, sick of it from my doctors office, and more. We should make a separate question, tell me the worst most frustrating service you ever received. :) It would be hard for me to pick just one.

DarlingRhadamanthus's avatar

@gorillapaws…Big Pharma does not own all vitamins and herbal medicines. I know that firsthand. There are scads of small independent organic companies that trade outside the loop…for now. Until all that is outlawed in favor of corporate greed.

Just as you have the choice to stick with your “scientifically proven” medicine, I don’t want my alternative choice taken away, either. That’s all. I believe that we all should have a choice.

HungryGuy's avatar

@DarlingRhadamanthus – Exactly! “Prescription” medications, auto insurance, etc. are all ways big corporations have used the law to extract money from the average person—and the insurance industry is the biggest crime racket of all!

gorillapaws's avatar

@DarlingRhadamanthus are the quotes around “scientifically proven” indicating that you don’t believe the FDA’s process of evaluating medical efficacy is rigorous enough? Or is it indicating that you don’t think Science itself is effective? Or perhaps something else?

Nullo's avatar

@Dr_C You hate Beck, no? So do they. Thus, they are like you.

@laureth Wal-Mart isn’t really as bad as people like to paint it, you know. Their biggest shortcoming is having an enormously effective business model.

gorillapaws's avatar

@Nullo “Their biggest shortcoming is having an enormously effective business model.”

You mean the one that involves anti-competitive practices, leaching money out of the government, and driving out all of the mom-and-pop businesses that employ the majority of Americans and pay a decent wage (i.e. the real capitalist American dreamers)? Or how about blackmailing manufacturers, forcing them to supply their products at unsustainable prices in exclusive agreements?

bolwerk's avatar

Wal-Mart is clever. They learned to exploit the massive subsidies suburbs receive and made it part of their business model.

mattbrowne's avatar

Yes, Monsanto.

bootonthroat's avatar

@laureth @gorillapaws

Wal*Mart is a terrific company. I am shocked at how gullible people are and laugh at anyone who would believe Wal*Mart can force a manufacturer to enter into an arrangement with them. The manufacturer only enters into partnerships that are the best they can get. Wal*Mart is a terrific company for manufacturers. How do you think they got so many to work with them?

laureth's avatar

Of course they can’t force people to enter into contracts with them. Similarly, they can’t force you to shop there, especially if you live in a small town with no other grocery stores for miles around. I mean, you could choose to subsist on nuts and berries, or go into dirt farming, or perhaps take a bus ride for a few hours to go to the next largest city that has a grocery store other than Wal*Mart. You have choices, you are not forced. But in reality, those choices are slim, and practicality dictates that when Wal*Mart has effectively soaked up all the other retailers, you sort of have to shop there.

Likewise, if you are unable to sell your goods through Wal*Mart (i.e., “have a contract”), you are barred from selling at the world’s largest retailer. It is a choice that a company could make – to try to go it without Wal*Mart. But it’s sometimes not a very practical choice. Reality dictates that manufacturers of cheap plastic crap and other goods have to deal with Wal*Mart (i.e., make a deal with the devil) at some point. In situations like that, the “choice” that the pro-Wal*Mart folks like to claim exists is mostly academic. So is our choice to breathe or eat food. We can stop at any time!

This example with big jars of pickles is exactly what I’m talking about.

bootonthroat's avatar

@laureth
All these people do have a choice to shop anywhere they want but so few of them want to shop anywhere but Wal*Mart that many stores do need to close. This is TERRIFIC thing. Those stores were not providing goods—they were providing overpriced nostalgia. People lie about what they want when you ask them. They say nice things, things made in the USA, mom-and-pop store things, etc but look at their actions. All those people are liars. They want cheap and convenient. Otherwise the mom and pop stores would stay open and no one would shop at W*M which in turn would go out of business. Stop deluding yourself about how you long to way overpay for pickles at a store open only during your regular work-hours and instead enjoy an AMAZING entire GALLON of pickles for the earth-shatteringly low price of $2.97. Now that is service the American way!

laureth's avatar

Keeping businesses open near you is crucial to keeping yourself employed. People think they can get both “everyday low prices” and keep their jobs, but it has proven to not be the case. I guess we must have a sense of priority – do we want to live in a world where most people nearby are out of work in exchange for our gallon of pickles, or do we want to have a better economy and the somewhat more expensive jar of pickles (and clean water, air, and the best medical care in the world, etc.) that helps this to happen? I know what I would prefer.

bolwerk's avatar

Wal-Mart is terrific at exploiting public subsidies. It pays its employees so little that they often qualify for foodstamps and income assistance. It doesn’t pay for the costs of increased traffic that feed its stores – government does. It often wrests cushy tax and land use giveaways from local governments, leverage that small businesses (the ones that employ the vast majority of the U.S. workfroce) cannot possible have. Even the road system that feeds Wal-Mart is heavily subsidized and economically inefficient (traffic congestion, anyone?). In other words, Wal-Mart is successful at receiving corporate welfare and indirect subsidies, sometimes by playing by the rules, sometimes not – something mom and pop local stores, which should theoretically be more efficient operations, cannot exploit.

Fix the above problem, and Big Box leverage over manufacturers would probably be reduced or disappear.

Of course, no, Wal-Mart not all bad, even for a behemoth – I wouldn’t say they’re the worst company in the world these days. They were heading down that road in the late 1990s-early 2000s though. These days their environmental sustainability leadership is lackluster, but commendable at least.

gorillapaws's avatar

@bootonthroat I believe you are the one who is deluded. Here are some facts from a documentary on Walmart.

bootonthroat's avatar

@laureth
“Keeping businesses open near you is crucial to keeping yourself employed. ” <== I have major issue with this. People are not entitled to live where there are no jobs. That pickle job is still there. You can’t have it in a jurisdiction that can’t compete because then everyone suffers. If the USA finds it cannot compete then maybe we need to build some more coal/nuclear power plants, get rid of some unions, and drill some wells. Ask yourself why Wal*Mart has to get its products from China. Is it because Wal*Mart is evil or because American citizens are as good at making plastic parts effectively as Steve Urcle is at basket ball. If you really think there are not enough jobs then why not export the illegals creating over 10,000,000 jobs for US citizens?

@bolwerk
do mom and pop stores not have roads to them? does w*m not pay taxes?

laureth's avatar

@bootonthroat – re: “People are not entitled to live where there are no jobs.”

I suppose, then, that we ought not ship back any illegals, eh? ;)

bolwerk's avatar

@bootonthroat: that’s the point, isn’t it? They’re paying for the services they and Wal-Mart consume. Wal-Mart, on the other hand, is not. Wal-Mart is everything neo-cons say is bad about poor people: a fuckin’ welfare queen. As for China and other countries reaping the benefits of liberal trade agreements, they don’t make things anywhere near as well as Americans do. They just make things at wages can’t Americans compete with, unions or no. If that is a problem, the solution is either to make things they lack the talent to make (theoretically what we do now) or to embargo them and allow our more expensive, higher quality alternatives to be free of competition from them – or something inbetween, like a tariff.

bootonthroat's avatar

@laureth
Yes, we should ship them back. People are also not entitled to enter the USA illegally!

MissAnthrope's avatar

@bootonthroat – Forgive me, but you have pretty much no idea how Wal-Mart operates.

bootonthroat's avatar

@bolwerk: are you against free trade?

@MissAnthrope: What falsehood have I stated about their operations?

bolwerk's avatar

@bootonthroat: no, but I’m not especially fond of financial capitalism. Truly free trade requires value equity. Either way, the logical conclusion of complaining about developing world price advantages is an embargo or tariff. At the same time, what liberals call “free trade” on balance hurts postindustrial economies more than it hurts developing economies. It also probably helps developing economies more than it hurts postindustrial economies.

MissAnthrope's avatar

@bootonthroat – The argument is much more than ‘they provide a service that is in demand’. They have a history of mistreating their employees, making them work overtime without pay, paying them so little that they have to supplement the income with public assistance.. but where else are these people going to work after Wal-Mart has run out the rest of the businesses? It kills small business, who cannot compete with their business practices. You may not have an issue with this, but I do.

Then, they buy products made in other countries, arguably at least some of which also have questionable labor practices. I personally don’t think it’s okay that people work for pennies just so our much richer nation can have its crappy items for $1. Not only that, but as has been seen over the past few years, the quality of these items is questionable and sometimes dangerous (i.e. toys with lead).

Anyway, I could go on because the problem is pretty huge, but I’ll spare everyone and simply recommend that you watch this film if you’re interested in hearing what it is I’m talking about.

bootonthroat's avatar

@MissAnthrope
I will never be satisfied with any moaning and groaning about low wages at Wal*Mart so long as we are maintaining an excess zero-skill workforce in America of 10–20MM illegals. If we have 10 million plus zero-skill workers here then what do we expect to happen to the wages of zero-skill jobs? This is simple supply and demand. We have created a HUGE supply so the type of people who work at Wal*Mart don’t deserve any pay as they add no incremental value to American society. A million Wal*Mart workers could drop dead tomorrow and the net result to American society would be positive as the unemployment lines would shrink to take up the slack. If you want to earn money you need to do something for society that society needs incrementally more of. You can’t be in a position where there are unemployed people sitting on their thumbs waiting to replace you. Have any of these people thought about doing something that society actually needs instead of retail? You may have seen a few automated cash registers. What if more cash registers become automated, stocking shelves becomes automated, and more people start ordering off the Internet resulting in the need for even less retail workers? Will all these people simply sit at home collecting a government check saying the robots took their job? People complaining about Wal*Mart taking their job is no different than people complaining about the horse and buggy jobs being lost to the automobile. They need to move on and do some real work instead of some make-busy work that society has an excess of soon-to-be-automated workers for.

MissAnthrope's avatar

@bootonthroat – The illegals issue is something else entirely. I find your viewpoint to be offensive, haughty, and again, misinformed. I don’t understand the rationale that the people who work at Wal-Mart don’t deserve any pay, because the truth is you are understating their value. There are places for ‘zero-skills’ workers in the job force. They do the jobs that you don’t want to do. Who would serve you and cook your food when you want to go out to eat? Seeing as these jobs are largely not automated, who would stock your shelves and ring you up when you need to buy groceries? Who would take away and deal with your trash every week? Who would labor in your garden, clean the bathrooms at places you frequent, help you find what you need at the store (and perhaps answer questions about different products so you can make a more informed purchase)? Or how about who would mine the coal that fuels 50% of the energy we use in the US? And on and on.

Your viewpoint is haughty in that you assume everyone in America can attend college. Having lived in a very economically depressed state, I can think of several reasons why someone may not make it to the point where they achieve a degree. It’s condescending of you to think your way is the only way and that if someone isn’t doing something of “importance”, they are worthless.

I get the feeling that it’s pointless to continue to debate this with you, so this is the last I will say. I hope you wake up a little bit and become at least somewhat more compassionate.

bootonthroat's avatar

@MissAnthrope

OK, you believe I am condescending… but am I incorrect?
You say that these things are not automated but they are! Only the very last step of stocking shelves is not automated but there are many more steps involved. Wal*Mart maintains giant automated facilities that handle the bulk of the work. This is where the real work gets done:
http://assets.mediaspanonline.com/prod/3070572/MP-Wal_Mart-warehouse_w500.jpg
Notice the giant room with a single worker. If you think the people on the floor couldn’t be eliminated as well you are wrong as well. Consider that if the cost of these workers went up models like bulk-buy would prevail. In these cases items are sold in giant quantities directly off pallets eliminating stocking. A forklift driver simply places a couple pallets and an entire night’s work for a stocker is done in minutes. This is without any additional investment in technology. Wal*Mart could fire its stockers and switch to that model overnight. They could disallow in-store returns and get rid of their customer service desk. They could install all automated registers and get rid of most of their cashiers. They could institute a swipe-card based membership policy with background check and eliminate much of their in-store security. Large numbers of unskilled employees is a nice-to-have but could CERTAINLY be worked around.

The same is true of the food industry. Consider that much of the food industry could simply be replaced by food prepared in factories. Consider the prepared salads, subs, and pastries sold at Star*Bucks. ... or the many prepared foods sold at grocery stores. This model combined with self-checkout allows for total automation.

As far as in-store experts I am able to get the same or better advise through the Internet on my phone using its integrated bar-code reader (which uses the camera). If I really want to know something I could always pay a service such as U-Clue.com (TERRIFIC SITE).

These people are NOT NEEDED. They are only utilized because they are such low cost. As soon as their cost increases they will be eliminated.

Also, I don’t assume everyone in America can (or should) attend college. I do assume everyone has access to the public library and therefore the Internet. Nothing stops me from acquiring any knowledge or skill I want… other people just prefer TV and a job at Wal*Mart.

SmashTheState's avatar

Someone’s hugbox is broken.

bolwerk's avatar

@SmashTheState: Hello Kitty! is a magnet for reactionary yuppies and suburbanites.

gorillapaws's avatar

@bootonthroat your oversimplification ignores the fact that many of the people who are unemployed, are so because Walmart used monopolistic tactics to drive their employers out of business, or force the company that they were working for to lay them off in favor of cheap foreign labor in order to meet the price quotas set by Walmart. Many of these positions lost aren’t unskilled, and yet now many have no choice but to take up work at the Walmart that put their employer out of business.

It’s the antithesis of good economics, where you replace good-paying skilled jobs, with unskilled positions that necessitate taking government assistance just to get by. I’m guessing you didn’t bother to look up any of the facts that I linked earlier.

Nullo's avatar

If it helps any, Sam’s Club paid me my overtime, when I worked it. They’re more likely to send you home when you hit 40 hours/week than not pay you.

bootonthroat's avatar

@Nullo Thank you!

@gorillapaws Aren’t you for Obamacare? How could you say everyone should get health-care based upon wages under Obamacare but then say that it is bad people are using this same-style program without Obamacare?

gorillapaws's avatar

@bootonthroat I’m not following your logic.

ItsAHabit's avatar

If it were a company, the Social Security System would be the worst company because it would be operating an enormous illegal Ponzi scheme.

connellc's avatar

My votes goes to Foxconn.

It was reporterd last Sunday in the Cleveland Plain Dealer in a syndicated story that Chinese workers would get some better raises or money.

Now that doesn’t look to be the case: see: http://9to5mac.com/foxconn_denies

(Apple is not paying Foxconn an additional subsidy toward improved wages for workers on the iPhone, iPad and Mac production lines, an executive has said. There have been claims that Apple has been paying a 2 per cent subsidy on Foxconn’s labour costs as a compensation for the manufacturers move to raise minimum wages on the Apple production lines. This isn’t true, a Foxconn executive told the National Business Daily this morning. The executive said the rumor is purely speculation and Foxconn has never received any subsidies from Apple… The intention of these payments was to end a wave of suicides among Foxconn workers, reportedly unhappy at long hours, long wages, anti-social working conditions and authoritarian management practises. Foxconn has moved to offer workers large pay hikes, while breaking some of its production units into plants it owns elsewhere in China.).

Of course, Apple could be of some help, because, say, a 64 GB iPad with 3G reportedly costs only $346.00 in materials and manufacturing costs, and those babies were priced by iSupply @ $829.00. (http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10451132-1.html)

I’m sure a 2 percent subsidy on a single Foxconn worker’s $200 monthly pay – $4 – is not going to cause Steve Jobs to lose any sleep.

gorillapaws's avatar

@connellc you do realize that Foxconn makes a lot more shit than Apple products right? They do Apple stuff, but they also make stuff for Dell, HP, PS2, PS3, Wii, Xbox360, phones for Motorola and Nokia, the Amazon Kindle and other products (source). So is Apple the only one of those that should be giving their workers a raise?

I think there are probably sweat-shops with child laborers in South America and SE Asia that are probably 100 times worse than Foxconn (not that it’s all that great of a place to work).

Response moderated (Writing Standards)
Mom2BDec2010's avatar

BP is the worst.

EverRose11's avatar

Allentown, PA-based electricity company PPL is hell on the world, but at least it’s upfront about it. On PPL’s website is a good section on its carbon emissions. Alas, “PPL currently has no formal greenhouse gas emissions reduction plan in place.” It blames the lack of coherent regulation… In my book there is j=not just one actually there is a list of nearly 15 I can think of that are as bad or worse then the next :-( .

EverRose11's avatar

OH and wait allow me to also mention this one for I imagine almost everyone of us can go to our kitchen cabinet and find more then one of their products right in our own home. One of the biggest packaged food companies is also one of the worst for the earth. Infact in 2006, ConAgra was ripped by CERES for its lack of environmentally responsible behavior. It apparently didn’t do much to fix that in the intervening years.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther