Weekend, plays

[jazzfish]

Things are different if you're gay: "It sounds as if, with a few exceptions, the kids were handling it just fine. It's some of the parents who are the problem."

Note to self: shop at Costco, not Wal-Mart. [Too bad there's not a CostCo within three hours of here.]

And in the . . . dude category, Fantagraphics to Publish The Complete Peanuts. Twenty-five books, two per year for 12.5 years, starting next month. Between this and the big-ass book of All The Far Side There Is (plus the daily goodness of Pearls), I'm set to be amused for ages. Once I acquire money, that is. [I was recently asked why I prefer Peanuts to Calvin and Hobbes. I suspect it's because I empathise a lot more with Charlie Brown and Linus than I ever did with Calvin.]

---

Satyrday: played the Game of Thrones boardgame again (yay!), went to rehearsal (yay?), went to work (uh, yay). Sunday I went to Driver Improvement School as part of paying off the debt to society incurred by getting caught exceeding the posted speed limit. It wasn't too bad; I've had college classes that were more boring, and I even learned a few things. (If your brakes fail, pump 'em. You may be able to build up enough pressure in the brake lines anyway. Don't immediately go to your parkbrake, you'll just burn it out.)

My GameCube SuperNES controller showed up on Satyrday as well, so I spent part of Sunday playing the original Legend of Zelda. I'd forgotten quite how ugly the game is-- not just in graphics, but in design. No map, no hints of where to go next. . . gah. I begin to understand why Nintendo was able to make money selling a strategy guide for fifteen-year-old games.

I'm currently doing two play-type things, both directed by Charity who was in Offending the Audience. The scene for her directing class is from Paula Vogel's most excellent How I Learned to Drive, in which I have to be a Greek Chorus member pretending to be the hick grandfather. It's, um, interesting. I had no idea I could be this convincing as a hick.

Too convincing, apparently. The other play is for Charity's playwriting class. Originally my part was that of a policeman called to investigate a noise complaint. Sometime last week she rewrote the scene so that it's now a neighbor. With a shotgun. An' a whole lotta dialect written into his speech patterns. There's a pretty long list of roles I never thought I'd be typecast as, and Good Ole Boy is near the top of it.

And Spiel tonight, at which there shall be more Gaming of Thrones, and before that I'll need to get my story knocked out and also do a first runthrough of my Taming scene.

Comments

[tirani.livejournal.com]

Um, might I ask where you managed to find a SuperNES style controler for the gamecube? *zelda fangrrl drools*

[jazzfish]

Here you go. It's a Cube controller without analog sticks. Supposedly works well with the GB player; works /really/ well with the Zelda bonus disc.

[tirani.livejournal.com]

Mmm. Purple. Purple SNES controler.

Mine. MUST BE MINE!

Now it is ;)

[dasphios.livejournal.com]

Might I ask how you're managing to play an NES game with a Super NES controller?

[jazzfish]

Using the Hori Digital controller (see previous comment) and the Zelda bonus disc, which has both NES Zelda games and both N64 Zelda games. (Sadly, no Link to the Past. Will have to buy a GB Player and the GameBoy version of the game.)

Wal-Mart

[zyxwvut.livejournal.com]

How long have I been telling you that Wal-Mart is eeeevil? %-}

Z

P.S.: For big-box superstore retail, I have found Target to be the least icky (invests in the communities where their stores are, at least).

Re: Wal-Mart

[jazzfish]

Actually, I don't think I've ever heard that from /you/ specifically. Though I may have just blurred it together with everyone else. :)

But yes, Wal-mart has become a place to avoid when possible.

[dasphios.livejournal.com]

"We're trying to teach appropriate behavior toward people's personal lives. We're trying to set parameters and find out what the appropriate procedures would be for kids."
Here we go with the 'appropriate' plague again. When's someone going to hunt down these spinelesss bastards and give them the thrashing they deserve?

[cxi162.livejournal.com]

Note to self: shop at Costco. not Wal-Mart. [Too bad there's not a CostCo within three hours of here.]

So, everyone goes and shops and CostCo. Soon they end up being the biggest kid on the hill and demanding the lowest prices from their suppliers. What then, go back to shopping at Wal-Mart? If suppliers are willing to give in to demands such that it puts them out of business, that means another company with better business sense will take over in their place and not give in to the demands. That's how business work and it's been going on for as long as there have been businesses to compete with each other.

[jazzfish]

Perhaps Costco will continue to treat its workers like human beings. Perhaps Wal-mart will begin to do the same.

I don't really expect you to care whether blue-collar workers are treated like human beings, though.

(Haven't forgotten our earlier discussion, either; a reply to the "Saddam thought he had WMDs" link is proving difficult to write non-insultingly.)

[cxi162.livejournal.com]

I don't really expect you to care whether blue-collar workers are treated like human beings, though.

I don't believe I addressed that issue. Perhaps I will a little bit. For starters, I don't think the solution to high medical costs is to pump money out of businesses to pay for it, but that's a whole separate topic. When in comes down to it, workers in this country are treated incredibly well compared to a lot of other countries. People in the US love to complain about how bad their job is, and they'll be happy to call you with their cell phone to tell you that, or drive over to your place in their car, or invite you up to their apartment where they get three square meals a day and discuss it. As a country we're spoiled as hell. Then, after all that the company is blamed for not paying all the health care costs, instead of the employee blaming themselves for mismanaging their finances. I know, I've gone the mismanagement route, but thanks to my wife we're on the track to improvement. Why do you think there are so many immigrants in this country? Because we treat our workers so bad and the living conditions here are so horrible? Hardly.

Furthermore, Wal-Mart added 99,000 jobs to the marketplace in a year when everyone is trying to say the economy is bad, and yet now we are supposed to boycott them. What is the purpose of that, to put all those new workers out on the street? Who exactly is getting shafted in that case? Wal-Mart has a turnover rate of 50%, that means 50% of the employees are leaving their entry level job to find better work, and opening up that 50% of the jobs for new workers entering the workforce. How is this kind of workforce turnover a bad thing? If anything, CostCo, by holding on to employees longer, is preventing new positions from opening up for those entering the workforce. On top of all this, the articles indicate that Wal-Mart is pretty much average in the retail industry, meaning that any retailer will look evil if you compare them to the shining star of CostCo.

However, is CostCo really that great? While it is a good place to work, it's bad for the economy in terms of available jobs and stock market issues. They also have a higher percentage of part-time employees who I'm sure don't get the max benefits listed.

Narrowly focused on the one issue of health care, and comparing Wal-Mart to only CostCo, you could easily say they are evil, but there's a lot more to the big picture. I'm not saying they are saints, but spare me the downtrodden blue-collar worker story. Perhaps if any of us had gone through the depression or worked in a turn of the century mill, we could talk about what real poor quality employment is like, but we have it too good to really fathom that.

[uilos.livejournal.com]

Furthermore, Wal-Mart added 99,000 jobs to the marketplace in a year when everyone is trying to say the economy is bad, and yet now we are supposed to boycott them. What is the purpose of that, to put all those new workers out on the street? Who exactly is getting shafted in that case?
Whoa, there. Can you back any of this up? What kind of pay are these new jobs giving people? Mnimum wage? Are there benefits? Is it better than they had before? More jobs does not mean better quality jobs. I feel that part of the reason the economy is bad is that people are coming out of a four year college debt and finding that the available jobs are working for WalMart. Boycott does not necessarily mean that WalMart fires people. Maybe it means that they start paying attention to a dissenting opinion and change their hiring practices.

Wal-Mart has a turnover rate of 50%, that means 50% of the employees are leaving their entry level job to find better work, and opening up that 50% of the jobs for new workers entering the workforce.
Again, I would like something to back this up. Not all of those people are leaving for something better. Some of them may be leaving because the pay is so bad that they can't support their family on it. Some of them may be leaving because there's no health insurance. Some of them may be leaving because they were treated badly. Some of them may be leaving because they were injured, on or off the job. Some of them were fired because they were unwilling to work mandantory overtime or be locked in after hours. You can't just say that all the people that are leaving are doing so for better jobs. Maybe they're leaving to take care of a new baby or an elderly parent.

How is this kind of workforce turnover a bad thing? If anything, CostCo, by holding on to employees longer, is preventing new positions from opening up for those entering the workforce. On top of all this, the articles indicate that Wal-Mart is pretty much average in the retail industry, meaning that any retailer will look evil if you compare them to the shining star of CostCo.
Oooo...I have to seriously disagree with you here. It sounds like what you are saying is that Costco is making the marketplace worse by offering better pay, better hours, and more benefits to people who might be otherwise unable to get them and that what they should do is fire their people so they can get cheaper workers. This does not improve the economy for anyone other than big business. Again, more positions does not equal better positions. And I add, average does not mean good.

Would you be a cashier for WalMart? Would you be a stocker for them? If you were fired from your job tomorrow, or the company went under (I'm thinking .bomb here) where would you go to support your family if the only one hiring in the area was WalMart?

[cxi162.livejournal.com]

Can you back any of this up?
The information comes from the article he linked to himself.

Is it better than they had before?
Yes, because before they probably didn't have a job. I would rate that as a significant improvement.

Boycott does not necessarily mean that WalMart fires people.
Either the boycott is meaningless (which is usually the case, but it makes people feel good), or the boycott is successful and cuts into the profits of the company. There are then two options for the company. Cut back on pay and benefits or cut back on workers. This is simple economics. You can't cut into the profits of a company and then expect them to pay more to their workers. All you've done is reduce the number of people employed, and increased the workload of those remaining.

Again, I would like something to back this up.
Read the article that was linked to.

Not all of those people are leaving for something better. Some of them may be leaving because the pay is so bad that they can't support their family on it.
How can they be leaving because they can't support their family on it, but not be going to something better? That doesn't make any sense.

Some of them may be leaving because there's no health insurance. Some of them may be leaving because they were treated badly. Some of them may be leaving because they were injured, on or off the job.
Well of course. I'm not saying 100% of everyone is happy or has the perfect job, but that exists everywhere, not just at Wal-Mart, and trying to single out Wal-Mart as somehow evil because they are just like everyone else (recall the that the article also indicated that Wal-Mart was about average for retailers) is just wrong.

It sounds like what you are saying is that Costco is making the marketplace worse by offering better pay, better hours, and more benefits to people who might be otherwise unable to get them and that what they should do is fire their people so they can get cheaper workers.
Nope, wrong. I was pointing out, from an economic standpoint, that CostCo stagnates the job market. I didn't say they should fire people or that their workers shouldn't get the benefits they do, as must as everyone seems to want to think that I'm heartless. Regardless of that, by holding on to workers, they hire less new workers. It's pretty simple math. If there are no new jobs, where are people entering the job market going to work?

Would you be a cashier for WalMart? Would you be a stocker for them? If you were fired from your job tomorrow, or the company went under (I'm thinking .bomb here) where would you go to support your family if the only one hiring in the area was WalMart?
Perhaps this is the fundamental difference here. This is, I'm sorry to say this so bluntly, a stupid question. I sure as hell would work at Wal-Mart if that were the only place hiring. That's painfully obvious. What am I supposed to do, not work? Vote for a democrat so we can more more to a socialist state and the rest of you could support me? Become a thief? Hell, I'd even work for Microsoft! I would be happy to have a job.

I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. Perhaps I have a fundamental problem with going through life and constantly looking for evil. I just can't do it, it's too depressing. I go through life being amazed at how lucky we are in this country and at this time in history. I feel very lucky to have the job I have. If I were in another job that wasn't so good, I would still be happy to have a job. Sure, I'd probably be looking for a better one, and that's not a bad thing. People should always be looking for better jobs. However, I certainly wouldn't sit there starving to death and turn my nose up at Wal-Mart saying, "I won't work there! Sure, I could pay my bills and eat and all, but they're 'the man' and 'evil' because they are so big."

[gkjfdh.livejournal.com]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/05/national/05WALM.html?ex=1081742400&en=0fba9b44401afe0a&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

"While Wal-Mart has turned to the ballot in a number of cities and towns to win the right to build its giant emporiums, the Inglewood initiative is significantly different. The proposal would essentially exempt Wal-Mart from all of Inglewood's planning, zoning and environmental regulations, creating a city-within-a-city subject only to its own rules. Wal-Mart has hired an advertising and public relations firm to market the initiative and is spending more than $1 million to support the measure, known as initiative 04-A ... the company paid signature gatherers for the ballot initiative more than it pays its average clerk."