Did we discuss this month-old Time magazine article, which said that Winco's
happy workers and well-organized stores meant they were a real threat
to Walmart's spotty stocking and high percentage of temps business model?

http://business.time.com/2013/08/07/...rst-nightmare/

On Mon, 9 Sep 2013 07:50:48 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

>Did we discuss this month-old Time magazine article, which said that Winco's
>happy workers and well-organized stores meant they were a real threat
>to Walmart's spotty stocking and high percentage of temps business model?
>
>http://business.time.com/2013/08/07/...rst-nightmare/

I don't recall such a conversation, but I wouldn't compare Walmart and
Winco. In my area, both stores are equally clean, etc., but there is
just something nicer about Winco -- in addition to the fact that Winco
is the lowest price in town. I like Winco. I was there when they
opened the doors on their first store and have been going there ever
since.
Janet US

On 9/9/2013 8:50 AM, wrote:
> Did we discuss this month-old Time magazine article, which said that Winco's
> happy workers and well-organized stores meant they were a real threat
> to Walmart's spotty stocking and high percentage of temps business model?
>
> http://business.time.com/2013/08/07/...rst-nightmare/
>

And toughly how long will it take them to saturate the nation and truly
compete?

The last Boise based grocer to try and crack the herd was named
Albertsons, guess what happened to them.

On Monday, September 9, 2013 9:27:16 AM UTC-7, Sqwertz wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Sep 2013 07:50:48 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>
>
>
> > Did we discuss this month-old Time magazine article, which said that Winco's
> > happy workers and well-organized stores meant they were a real threat
> > to Walmart's spotty stocking and high percentage of temps business model?
>
> >
>
> > http://business.time.com/2013/08/07/...rst-nightmare/
>
>
>
> They only compete on the grocery front, which is probably only 25-30%
> of Walmart's retail business. So I don't see them being a big
> competitor.
>

Walmart is really promoting their grocery business on TV, substituting Walmart steaks at steakhouses, and Walmart produce at farmers markets. Masterchef on TV features Walmart ingredients heavily. Walmart clearly is looking to groceries as its pathway to continued growth.

On 9/9/2013 1:46 PM, wrote:

>> They only compete on the grocery front, which is probably only 25-30%
>> of Walmart's retail business. So I don't see them being a big
>> competitor.
>>
>
> Walmart is really promoting their grocery business on TV, substituting Walmart steaks at steakhouses, and Walmart produce at farmers markets. Masterchef on TV features Walmart ingredients heavily. Walmart clearly is looking to groceries as its pathway to continued growth.
>

The WalMart in our town just expanded and added groceries. The store I
usually go to and would prefer is less than 1/2 mile away. WM has
gotten myh attention though. When I can save $2 on a jar of brand name
peanut butter and $3.50 on a 2 pound hunk of Cabot cheese, I have to
take notice and buy there. A half hour ago I had some grapes that were
very tasty. They won't get all of my business, but I can see where
being selective can save me a few bucks.

On 2013-09-09 3:54 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

> The WalMart in our town just expanded and added groceries. The store I
> usually go to and would prefer is less than 1/2 mile away. WM has
> gotten myh attention though. When I can save $2 on a jar of brand name
> peanut butter and $3.50 on a 2 pound hunk of Cabot cheese, I have to
> take notice and buy there. A half hour ago I had some grapes that were
> very tasty. They won't get all of my business, but I can see where
> being selective can save me a few bucks.


Enjoys it while you can. Then when they can find an even cheaper source
of peanut butter you won't be able to get your favourite. When WalMart
is the only store in town you will only be able to buy what WM can buy
and sell cheap.

On Monday, September 9, 2013 4:06:50 PM UTC-4, Dave Smith wrote:
>
> Enjoys it while you can. Then when they can find an even cheaper source
> of peanut butter you won't be able to get your favourite. When WalMart
> is the only store in town you will only be able to buy what WM can buy
> and sell cheap.

Unfortunately it's a symptom of the lack of health of the
US economy and political system. Price, rather than
quality, is the main driver, with the middle class
continuing to shrink, the rich getting richer and the poor
getting poorer. Until the USA realizes that its policies
have made it one of the poorest industrial countries in
the world things will continue to get worse.

http://www.richardfisher.com

On 9/9/2013 2:06 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2013-09-09 3:54 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>> The WalMart in our town just expanded and added groceries. The store I
>> usually go to and would prefer is less than 1/2 mile away. WM has
>> gotten myh attention though. When I can save $2 on a jar of brand name
>> peanut butter and $3.50 on a 2 pound hunk of Cabot cheese, I have to
>> take notice and buy there. A half hour ago I had some grapes that were
>> very tasty. They won't get all of my business, but I can see where
>> being selective can save me a few bucks.
>
>
> Enjoys it while you can. Then when they can find an even cheaper source
> of peanut butter you won't be able to get your favourite. When WalMart
> is the only store in town you will only be able to buy what WM can buy
> and sell cheap.
>
>
Isn't it a bit extreme to suggest that Wal Mart will be the only store
in town?

Even in small towns they are rarely the only grocer.

On Mon, 09 Sep 2013 15:54:35 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

>On 9/9/2013 1:46 PM, wrote:
>
>>> They only compete on the grocery front, which is probably only 25-30%
>>> of Walmart's retail business. So I don't see them being a big
>>> competitor.
>>>
>>
>> Walmart is really promoting their grocery business on TV, substituting Walmart steaks at steakhouses, and Walmart produce at farmers markets. Masterchef on TV features Walmart ingredients heavily. Walmart clearly is looking to groceries as its pathway to continued growth.
>>
>
>The WalMart in our town just expanded and added groceries. The store I
>usually go to and would prefer is less than 1/2 mile away. WM has
>gotten myh attention though. When I can save $2 on a jar of brand name
>peanut butter and $3.50 on a 2 pound hunk of Cabot cheese, I have to
>take notice and buy there. A half hour ago I had some grapes that were
>very tasty. They won't get all of my business, but I can see where
>being selective can save me a few bucks.

There are two Super Walmarts near where I live, both have always sold
groceries. From what I see more then half their revenue is from
groceries. All name brand groceries are exactly the same quality as
from any other store, only they cost substantially less (~30%), Heinz
ketchup, Bush's beans, Carolina rice, etc. is the same everywhere. I
like their deli, it's cleaner and operated more professionally than
any other I've seen. Recently Walmart has upgraded their produce
department, excellent quality. The only food item I don't buy from
Walmart is their fresh meats, they just don't look appetizing with how
they are packaged (in plastic tubs-they look slimey), and there is no
butcher. Walmart also sells a lot of toiletries and OTC/Rx drugs.

On 2013-09-09 4:16 PM, Helpful person wrote:

> Unfortunately it's a symptom of the lack of health of the
> US economy and political system. Price, rather than
> quality, is the main driver, with the middle class
> continuing to shrink, the rich getting richer and the poor
> getting poorer. Until the USA realizes that its policies
> have made it one of the poorest industrial countries in
> the world things will continue to get worse.
>
We have to remember that 70 years ago the Japanese made the mistake of
attacking the US. Rather than humbling the US and forcing it to stay out
of the conflict it brought the US into the war and put the American
industrial might into high gear manufacturing ships, planes, arms and
ammunition, and enough for their own needs and to equip the Allies.

I realize that the military is much more high tech now that it was in WW
II, but I still have to wonder how well American industry could manage
are arming the nation in another major conflict, or how the rest of the
industrial and other sectors of the economy will be able to afford to
keep its technological advantage.

Dave Smith wrote:
>
> I realize that the military is much more high tech now that it was in WW
> II, but I still have to wonder how well American industry could manage
> are arming the nation in another major conflict,

The US carries the "big stick" right now. If we lose that advantage
you can blame the democrats that constantly want to cut military
spending. I think it's necessary insurance against lots of crazies in
this world.

G.

"Janet Bostwick" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 9 Sep 2013 07:50:48 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>
>>Did we discuss this month-old Time magazine article, which said that
>>Winco's
>>happy workers and well-organized stores meant they were a real threat
>>to Walmart's spotty stocking and high percentage of temps business model?
>>
>>http://business.time.com/2013/08/07/...rst-nightmare/
>
> I don't recall such a conversation, but I wouldn't compare Walmart and
> Winco. In my area, both stores are equally clean, etc., but there is
> just something nicer about Winco -- in addition to the fact that Winco
> is the lowest price in town. I like Winco. I was there when they
> opened the doors on their first store and have been going there ever
> since.
> Janet US

Agree that they don't compare. The closest Wal-Mart we have with a full
grocery is in Marysville. They also have a Winco and a military commissary.
So lotsa competition. I have not been to that Winco so don't know how it
compares to mine. But mine is very clean and usually well stocked.

> wrote in message
...
On Monday, September 9, 2013 9:27:16 AM UTC-7, Sqwertz wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Sep 2013 07:50:48 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>
>
>
> > Did we discuss this month-old Time magazine article, which said that
> > Winco's
> > happy workers and well-organized stores meant they were a real threat
> > to Walmart's spotty stocking and high percentage of temps business
> > model?
>
> >
>
> > http://business.time.com/2013/08/07/...rst-nightmare/
>
>
>
> They only compete on the grocery front, which is probably only 25-30%
> of Walmart's retail business. So I don't see them being a big
> competitor.
>

Walmart is really promoting their grocery business on TV, substituting
Walmart steaks at steakhouses, and Walmart produce at farmers markets.
Masterchef on TV features Walmart ingredients heavily. Walmart clearly is
looking to groceries as its pathway to continued growth.

---

I had forgotten. They do have grocery stores now. Good prices but somewhat
pitiful produce department. And I didn't check the meat. The store is not
convenient to me so not a place I'd likely go again. But I will drive 7 or
so miles to Winco.

"Ed Pawlowski" > wrote in message
...
> On 9/9/2013 1:46 PM, wrote:
>
>>> They only compete on the grocery front, which is probably only 25-30%
>>> of Walmart's retail business. So I don't see them being a big
>>> competitor.
>>>
>>
>> Walmart is really promoting their grocery business on TV, substituting
>> Walmart steaks at steakhouses, and Walmart produce at farmers markets.
>> Masterchef on TV features Walmart ingredients heavily. Walmart clearly is
>> looking to groceries as its pathway to continued growth.
>>
>
> The WalMart in our town just expanded and added groceries. The store I
> usually go to and would prefer is less than 1/2 mile away. WM has gotten
> myh attention though. When I can save $2 on a jar of brand name peanut
> butter and $3.50 on a 2 pound hunk of Cabot cheese, I have to take notice
> and buy there. A half hour ago I had some grapes that were very tasty.
> They won't get all of my business, but I can see where being selective can
> save me a few bucks.

Most of my Wal-Mart shopping is online. Not all of the food can be
purchased this way but I can get jam and sunseed butter.

On 9/9/2013 7:19 PM, Mark Thorson wrote:
>
> Japan stayed defeated after the war.

Japan was built back up by the US after WWII.

Jill

Dave Smith wrote:
>
> I realize that the military is much more high tech now that it was in WW
> II, but I still have to wonder how well American industry could manage
> are arming the nation in another major conflict, or how the rest of the
> industrial and other sectors of the economy will be able to afford to
> keep its technological advantage.

We're already armed to the teeth. We have 10
nuclear-powered supercarrier battle groups.
France has one. Nobody else has any. Even
Russia has only one diesel aircraft carrier.
Italy has two small aircraft carriers.

In other categories, we dominate the rest of
the world, although Russia come close in a
few areas like bombers and land-based ICBMs.

There's no conceivable conflict in which we
would not have an overwhelming edge in military
hardware, just drawing on the inventory we
already have.

We've recently started building a new generation
of nuclear supercarriers. That's a total waste
of money. We're not facing any potential enemies
that justify such an enormous building program.
Japan stayed defeated after the war. Russia is
no longer interested in conquering the world
(if they ever were). China has a small military
for such a large nation.

I wish we could heavily cut back our military.
We're set up to fight and win a war against an
enemy that doesn't exist anymore, if it ever
existed.

Sqwertz wrote:
>
> On Mon, 09 Sep 2013 15:54:35 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> > On 9/9/2013 1:46 PM, wrote:
> >
> >>> They only compete on the grocery front, which is probably only 25-30%
> >>> of Walmart's retail business. So I don't see them being a big
> >>> competitor.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Walmart is really promoting their grocery business on TV, substituting Walmart steaks at steakhouses, and Walmart produce at farmers markets. Masterchef on TV features Walmart ingredients heavily. Walmart clearly is looking to groceries as its pathway to continued growth.
> >>
> >
> > The WalMart in our town just expanded and added groceries. The store I
> > usually go to and would prefer is less than 1/2 mile away. WM has
> > gotten myh attention though. When I can save $2 on a jar of brand name
> > peanut butter and $3.50 on a 2 pound hunk of Cabot cheese, I have to
> > take notice and buy there. A half hour ago I had some grapes that were
> > very tasty. They won't get all of my business, but I can see where
> > being selective can save me a few bucks.
>
> Your other store must be overly expensive. In many cases, Walmart
> here matches the prices of H-E-B, rather than H-E-B having to lower
> their price to match Walmart.
>
> Grapes? I hardly ever see seasonal fruit like that at Walmart. They
> didn't even carry Hatch chiles this year. Their veggie and fruit
> section is very minimal. And Cabot cheese is much too esoteric for
> our Walmart.
>
> -sw

Ouch! The two Walmarts near me both seem to have a decent selection of
most everything, though I still avoid shopping there if I can find what
I want at the other area Albertson's or Krogers, or whatever.

Julie Bove wrote:
>
> > wrote in message
> ...
> On Monday, September 9, 2013 9:27:16 AM UTC-7, Sqwertz wrote:
> > On Mon, 9 Sep 2013 07:50:48 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Did we discuss this month-old Time magazine article, which said that
> > > Winco's
> > > happy workers and well-organized stores meant they were a real threat
> > > to Walmart's spotty stocking and high percentage of temps business
> > > model?
> >
> > >
> >
> > > http://business.time.com/2013/08/07/...rst-nightmare/
> >
> >
> >
> > They only compete on the grocery front, which is probably only 25-30%
> > of Walmart's retail business. So I don't see them being a big
> > competitor.
> >
>
> Walmart is really promoting their grocery business on TV, substituting
> Walmart steaks at steakhouses, and Walmart produce at farmers markets.
> Masterchef on TV features Walmart ingredients heavily. Walmart clearly is
> looking to groceries as its pathway to continued growth.
>
> ---
>
> I had forgotten. They do have grocery stores now. Good prices but somewhat
> pitiful produce department. And I didn't check the meat. The store is not
> convenient to me so not a place I'd likely go again. But I will drive 7 or
> so miles to Winco.

As the economy continues to fail, groceries will certainly be the area
that will survive the longest as non-essentials are skipped in favor of
keeping food on the table.

On 9/9/2013 4:06 PM, Dave Smith wrote:

>
> Enjoys it while you can. Then when they can find an even cheaper source
> of peanut butter you won't be able to get your favourite. When WalMart
> is the only store in town you will only be able to buy what WM can buy
> and sell cheap.
>
>
WM may thin the herd, but with three other sores in town i will take a
very long time. Certain foods I'm fussy about and will travel some
distance if I must to get them. Doubt I will try their meats as I don't
trust the quality.

I'm curious how they may affect the prices of the other stores. I expect
differences, but 30% is a lot. Once established prices may rise too.

In article >,
Mark Thorson > wrote:

> We're not facing any potential enemies
> that justify such an enormous building program.
> Japan stayed defeated after the war. Russia is
> no longer interested in conquering the world
> (if they ever were). China has a small military
> for such a large nation.

I misjudged you.

leo

On Monday, September 9, 2013 5:42:55 PM UTC-4, Gary wrote:
>
> The US carries the "big stick" right now. If we lose that advantage
> you can blame the democrats that constantly want to cut military
> spending. I think it's necessary insurance against lots of crazies in
> this world.
>
> G.

I have difficulty remembering a time over the last 60
years when the USA was not at war. This has usually been
to boost the political aspirations of the politicians that
happen to be in power. In most cases they have fabricated
reasons for war.

The latest example is Syria. We completely ignore
thousands of peoples around the world being dispossessed
and killed, but decide to threaten Syria where very few people (in comparison) have been affected. This while
citing a treaty that Syria has not even signed. (As a
comparison the US regularly ignores international treaties
that have become inconvenient that it has signed.)

There is a very strong argument that the "crazies" are the USA, trying to enforce their religion in the form of democracy (USA style) on the rest of the world. Not only is this immoral, it is impracticable.

It's time the USA stops being the "bully boy" of the
world, especially as they can no longer afford the
expense.

It's most unfortunate to continue this policy, especially
considering the amount of good the USA does in the form of
humanitarian aid around the world. Instead of getting
it's due credit, the USA, in many countries, is seen as
the evil aggressor.

http://www.richardfisher.com

On 9/10/2013 8:55 AM, Helpful person wrote:
> It's time the USA stops being the "bully boy" of the
> world, especially as they can no longer afford the
> expense.

You must be pleased to know, as I am, that over 60% of the US opposes
these strikes.

On 2013-09-10 11:06 AM, casa contenta wrote:
> On 9/10/2013 8:55 AM, Helpful person wrote:
>> It's time the USA stops being the "bully boy" of the
>> world, especially as they can no longer afford the
>> expense.
>
> You must be pleased to know, as I am, that over 60% of the US opposes
> these strikes.


Yeah..... now... after getting a bloody nose in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The plan was that they would roll in and give freedom and democracy and
the people would be thrilled, but it seems they don't value freedom and
democracy.

On 9/10/2013 9:47 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2013-09-10 11:06 AM, casa contenta wrote:
>> On 9/10/2013 8:55 AM, Helpful person wrote:
>>> It's time the USA stops being the "bully boy" of the
>>> world, especially as they can no longer afford the
>>> expense.
>>
>> You must be pleased to know, as I am, that over 60% of the US opposes
>> these strikes.
>
>
> Yeah..... now... after getting a bloody nose in Iraq and Afghanistan.
> The plan was that they would roll in and give freedom and democracy and
> the people would be thrilled, but it seems they don't value freedom and
> democracy.

We fared better than the Russians (no small feat) and managed not to
completely decimate Iraq, which we have now been paying handsomely to
rebuild. Is it any wonder we have budgetary nightmares?

You are correct, they seem unable to comprehend what freedom and
democracy are, and I'm not willing to try and teach them either...

This WMD turn-in program had better get done or there will be large
scale protests in the streets, mark my words, or The President's, "Yes
we can!"

On Tue, 10 Sep 2013 11:47:43 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> On 2013-09-10 11:06 AM, casa contenta wrote:
> > On 9/10/2013 8:55 AM, Helpful person wrote:
> >> It's time the USA stops being the "bully boy" of the
> >> world, especially as they can no longer afford the
> >> expense.
> >
> > You must be pleased to know, as I am, that over 60% of the US opposes
> > these strikes.
>
>
> Yeah..... now... after getting a bloody nose in Iraq and Afghanistan.
> The plan was that they would roll in and give freedom and democracy and
> the people would be thrilled, but it seems they don't value freedom and
> democracy.

Especially Afghanistan... after the British and Soviets had given up
in disgust. What made our politicians think we could do any better?
It's sad to see women backslide to the fifteenth century, but that's
the way they want it.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On Tuesday, September 10, 2013 11:56:57 AM UTC-4, casa contenta wrote:
>
> You are correct, they seem unable to comprehend what freedom and
> democracy are, and I'm not willing to try and teach them either...
>
I find it interesting that the many people from the USA truly believe that their
method of government is unequivocally the best.

On Tue, 10 Sep 2013 09:26:26 -0700 (PDT), Helpful person
> wrote:

> On Tuesday, September 10, 2013 11:56:57 AM UTC-4, casa contenta wrote:
> >
> > You are correct, they seem unable to comprehend what freedom and
> > democracy are, and I'm not willing to try and teach them either...
> >
> I find it interesting that the many people from the USA truly believe that their
> method of government is unequivocally the best.

It's the best we've got. What I object to is forcing it on other
cultures who don't want it and are unable to handle it after they are
restructured.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On 9/10/2013 11:22 AM, sf wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Sep 2013 09:26:26 -0700 (PDT), Helpful person
> > wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday, September 10, 2013 11:56:57 AM UTC-4, casa contenta wrote:
>>>
>>> You are correct, they seem unable to comprehend what freedom and
>>> democracy are, and I'm not willing to try and teach them either...
>>>
>> I find it interesting that the many people from the USA truly believe that their
>> method of government is unequivocally the best.
>
> It's the best we've got. What I object to is forcing it on other
> cultures who don't want it and are unable to handle it after they are
> restructured.
>
+1

On 2013-09-10 12:26 PM, Helpful person wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 10, 2013 11:56:57 AM UTC-4, casa contenta wrote:
>>
>> You are correct, they seem unable to comprehend what freedom and
>> democracy are, and I'm not willing to try and teach them either...
>>
> I find it interesting that the many people from the USA truly believe that their
> method of government is unequivocally the best.
>


Keep up the rhetoric long enough and people are indoctrinated into
thinking it's true. They are not the only people in the world with
democracy. They are not the only people in the world with rights and
freedoms. Some seem to think they are.

On Monday, September 9, 2013 10:46:03 AM UTC-7, wrote:
> On Monday, September 9, 2013 9:27:16 AM UTC-7, Sqwertz wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 9 Sep 2013 07:50:48 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > > Did we discuss this month-old Time magazine article, which said that Winco's
>
> > > happy workers and well-organized stores meant they were a real threat
>
> > > to Walmart's spotty stocking and high percentage of temps business model?
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > http://business.time.com/2013/08/07/...rst-nightmare/
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > They only compete on the grocery front, which is probably only 25-30%
>
> > of Walmart's retail business. So I don't see them being a big
>
> > competitor.
>
> >
>
>
>
> Walmart is really promoting their grocery business on TV, substituting Walmart steaks at steakhouses, and Walmart produce at farmers markets. Masterchef on TV features Walmart ingredients heavily. Walmart clearly is looking to groceries as its pathway to continued growth.

too bad it's mostly all GMO foods.

On 9/10/2013 1:40 PM, wrote:
>>
>>
>> Walmart is really promoting their grocery business on TV, substituting Walmart steaks at steakhouses, and Walmart produce at farmers markets. Masterchef on TV features Walmart ingredients heavily. Walmart clearly is looking to groceries as its pathway to continued growth.
>
> too bad it's mostly all GMO foods.
>

Mostly? That means more than 50%. What do you know that the rest of us
do not?

On Tuesday, September 10, 2013 1:22:26 PM UTC-4, sf wrote:
>
> It's the best we've got. What I object to is forcing it on other
> cultures who don't want it and are unable to handle it after they are
> restructured.
>
It's not the best we've got. It's what we have.

On 9/10/2013 11:30 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2013-09-10 12:26 PM, Helpful person wrote:
>> On Tuesday, September 10, 2013 11:56:57 AM UTC-4, casa contenta wrote:
>>>
>>> You are correct, they seem unable to comprehend what freedom and
>>> democracy are, and I'm not willing to try and teach them either...
>>>
>> I find it interesting that the many people from the USA truly believe
>> that their
>> method of government is unequivocally the best.
>>
>
>
> Keep up the rhetoric long enough and people are indoctrinated into
> thinking it's true. They are not the only people in the world with
> democracy. They are not the only people in the world with rights and
> freedoms. Some seem to think they are.

Do you find any fault with your own governance, or just ours?

On 9/10/2013 12:03 PM, Helpful person wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 10, 2013 1:22:26 PM UTC-4, sf wrote:
>>
>> It's the best we've got. What I object to is forcing it on other
>> cultures who don't want it and are unable to handle it after they are
>> restructured.
>>
> It's not the best we've got. It's what we have.
>

It isn't a static entity, but it's still attractive enough to draw
immigrants (legal and illegal) from all over the world, isn't it?

On Tuesday, September 10, 2013 2:47:23 PM UTC-4, casa contenta wrote:
>
> It isn't a static entity, but it's still attractive enough to draw
> immigrants (legal and illegal) from all over the world, isn't it?

You really have fallen in with the "America is Wonderful" group. There are many other cultures in the world. Some are better and some are worse. Depends on your point of view. None are the best.

http://www.richardfisher.com

On 9/10/2013 1:02 PM, Helpful person wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 10, 2013 2:47:23 PM UTC-4, casa contenta wrote:
>>
>> It isn't a static entity, but it's still attractive enough to draw
>> immigrants (legal and illegal) from all over the world, isn't it?
>
> You really have fallen in with the "America is Wonderful" group.

Oh it's worse than that, I was -born_ into it!

> There are many other cultures in the world.

Yes there are, so?

> Some are better and some are worse.

That's a matter of taste.

> Depends on your point of view.

It does.

> None are the best.

That would be up to me to decide for myself, thank you.

On 2013-09-10 2:45 PM, casa contenta wrote:

>>
>> Keep up the rhetoric long enough and people are indoctrinated into
>> thinking it's true. They are not the only people in the world with
>> democracy. They are not the only people in the world with rights and
>> freedoms. Some seem to think they are.
>
> Do you find any fault with your own governance, or just ours?


Was I referring to the government?

On Tue, 10 Sep 2013 11:03:45 -0700 (PDT), Helpful person
> wrote:

> On Tuesday, September 10, 2013 1:22:26 PM UTC-4, sf wrote:
> >
> > It's the best we've got. What I object to is forcing it on other
> > cultures who don't want it and are unable to handle it after they are
> > restructured.
> >
> It's not the best we've got. It's what we have.

When one is the only choice, it's also the best we have to choose
from. Other forms of democracy look interesting, but I'm fine with
the one we have... I like it being a democracy within a republic.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On Tue, 10 Sep 2013 15:48:42 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> On 2013-09-10 2:45 PM, casa contenta wrote:
>
> >>
> >> Keep up the rhetoric long enough and people are indoctrinated into
> >> thinking it's true. They are not the only people in the world with
> >> democracy. They are not the only people in the world with rights and
> >> freedoms. Some seem to think they are.
> >
> > Do you find any fault with your own governance, or just ours?
>
>
> Was I referring to the government?

I think you're buying false assumptions.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On 9/10/2013 1:48 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2013-09-10 2:45 PM, casa contenta wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Keep up the rhetoric long enough and people are indoctrinated into
>>> thinking it's true. They are not the only people in the world with
>>> democracy. They are not the only people in the world with rights and
>>> freedoms. Some seem to think they are.
>>
>> Do you find any fault with your own governance, or just ours?
>
>
> Was I referring to the government?
>
Well are they not the ones who export freedoms and democracy?