Funniest part to me is the paragraph where the NYT writer lambasts WMT for setting up a "failed" college tuition program THREE years ago that only has 400 graduates so far. The WMT guy gently reminds him that most degrees take a good FOUR years or so to complete. Hello?

Go to the NYT and read the whole thing. (America's 'most despised retailer'?) Then browse the comments section, most of which are aggressively enthusiastic in their approval of the whole soak-the-evil-corporate-oligarchs line.

This isn't news. It isn't even an editorial. It is naked agitprop. And the target audience roars its approval. We live in very, very dark times.

Walmart's cheap generic prescriptions have done more for poor and working class people's health care than any bill Congress has ever passed.

Once again, an inconvenient group of facts reveals NYT bias and Progressive agenda. No longer "All the news that's fit to print" it is now a fiishwrapper.

That was a total punking of the NYT by Walmart. My opinon of Walmart soars here.

Starbucks offers free tuition to all employees? No wonder I can't afford their coffee.

Evidently college is bad when it's "for profit" - and ASU is presumably not making money off of Starbucks' reimbursement plan?

I can't make myself think like a Times writer.

Fortunately.

Remember, inequality is worse in Progressive controlled states.
cf. http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/189921/

WalMart should try to take out an ad in the New York Times to publish this.

OCB, they might read it but will say they didn't. Then, to not bring on further debate, they will ignore it, and, in their world, it never happened.

There are things I don't like about WalMart. Especially since Sam's influence was no longer in force, they squeeze hell out of vendors just because they can. They are such a large part of the market for so many things, almost no one can refuse to do business with them. When Sam was alive and active in the company they would often pay a premium to buy American made goods. Since liberals like Hillary became part of their decision making (she was on the board of directors when Slick Willie was gubnor) they gut their suppliers and buy whatever is cheapest with no regard to where it is made.

HOWEVER, if the NYT were truly concerned about income inequality and the decline of the middle class, they would push policies which would make damn sure we have more good paying jobs then we have workers. Result - pay goes up in relation to the cost of basic living necessities.

The policies admired by the NYT destroy good paying jobs in America. There are no words in the English language that I am aware of that can adequately describe the hypocrisy of that bunch of rat bastard commies.