Talk:Wall box

message: I have added the deleted Warrington phone box and Menai Bridge post box photos together with the Llandudno square box photo and also for completeness the solitary inset wall box photo to the gallary of photos at the Post box article. NoelWalley 08:16, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Psudo" Wall Boxes

message: It's not a "7", it's a Tironian et. --Zilog Jones (talk) 03:34, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "P7T" 

message: Name
Instructor
Course
Date 
Public versus Private Schools
Whether public schools are better than private ones, or the vice versa, is a common concern for parents with school-going children. Often, parents find themselves in the dilemma of making an appropriate decision and choice regarding their children’s school. Appreciably, the two types of schools differ significantly from multiple dimensions much as the focus is common; offering quality education. An irrefutable observation is that many people are biased in opinions because of limited exposure and knowledge of what happens in both types of institutes. A critical review of their fundamental differences and similarities shows that both have unique advantages although whatever public schools offer is available in the private ones although at a relatively higher cost and quality guarantee.
The bottom line of the discrepancy between private and public institutions goes down to the tuition and other charges. Parents with children in public schools have a better experience because these institutions cannot charge tuition fees as they please since they are funded through local, state, and federal taxes (Duine Par. 3). Unfortunately, public schools operate under sophisticated systems influenced by political shortfalls and can even be underfunded. By virtue of being government funded, public schools are bound to rules and regulations that require them to follow certain procedures. Contrary, private schools must generate their funding from tuition fees, fundraisers, and other avenues, which translates to high education expenses yet we all contribute towards public schools’ funding.
Other than the differences related to the amount of tuition fees and sources of funding for private and public schools, the two differ in admission procedures and even the student population. According to government regulations, public schools must enroll all students as long as they meet government conditions, and regardless of their academic abilities, religious creeds, or other factors (Wolf 4). Public schools, however, enroll selectively and may deny admission based on academic abilities or special needs requirements. Often, these schools seek to admit highly capable candidates to maintain the institution’s image of an academically exemplary institution. The school population and class size is comparatively larger in public schools compared to private schools, which influences the education standards to the detriment in public institutions (Wolf 5).
There exists a discrepancy between the curriculum development in public and private schools. While public schools must adhere to state or federal guidelines on specific procedures and standards for curriculum development, private schools have the freedom and room to choose a curriculum and assessment model that they consider as the most suitable (Duine Par. 4). The freedom to design independent curriculum and assessment approaches is often used by private institutions to develop and implement the most effective and reliable approaches, which results in higher standards and outcomes for the students. With financial independence and freedom from government interference, private institutions are in a better position to customize the curricula in accordance with the student’s needs, availability of resources, and other factors. 
In summary, both public and private schools have certain unique benefits that must be evaluated before sending a child to any of them. While public institutions tend to operate at the minimum standards, it is undeniable that private schools go a step further to deliver the best possible, mainly because they are in competition for business. A comparison between the two has revealed that private schools are lesser subjects to government regulations. They have smaller class sizes and tend to admit academically talented students who can help to keep the school at the top. The only major disadvantage, which makes public schools seem better, is the large amounts of tuition and other costs. Parents who want the best education for their kids, therefore, have private schools as the choice as long as they are ready to pay the extra coin. 
 
Works Cited
Duine, Chris. "Private versus public." 19 May 2016. Great Schools. Web. 21 September 2016. <http://www.greatschools.org/gk/articles/private-vs-public-schools/>.
Wolf, Patrick J. "Comparing Public Schools to Private." 12 July 2015. Education Net. Web. 20 September 2016. <http://educationnext.org/comparing-public-schools-private/>.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiflae (talk • contribs) 18:45, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Private Vs Public Schools 

message: Name
Instructor
Course
Date
Wal-Mart Stores not good for America
Being the largest chain store and retailer for many years, both effusive praises and vicious attacks become inevitable. From its website, the store operates over 8, 000 stores with 2.1 million employees. The company sells over $400 billion worth of services and goods every year and continues to make profits in the range of over $18 billion annually (Jantzen, Pescatrice and Braunstein 61). Much as Wal-Mart is not the only company occasionally in the public domain because of its policies, it has turned out as the symbol of the employer to employee conflicts. Undeniably, the corporation makes much money to cushion itself from controversial employment policies and workplace practices. Surprisingly, stories persist about how the company continues to violate wage laws, healthcare provisions, exploit its workers, and equally important, the anti-union stance expressed in the company policies. One will certainly question why will face several lawsuits every year if at all is well. 
Wal-Mart’s anti-union policies are now popular and continue to become worse over the years. Earlier, a video leaked showing that the management resolved to close one of its stores in Quebec after the workers unionized. Although the cited reason was “economic reasons” the Quebec’s labor relations board pronounced the closure and consequential firings as illegal (Jantzen, Pescatrice and Braunstein 62). It became evident from the board's probe that Wal-Mart closed down as a means to punish the unionized workers. In a certain revealing from the video, the company explains that it solely prefers direct and open communication with all stakeholders; hence, considers unions as unnecessary. Wal-Mart closed five stores citing “plumbing problems” as the basis of the decision, an excuse that translates to the fear of “union problems” (Wellum 234). Any major employer demonstrating a disregard for unionization certainly has some mischievous intentions such as employees’ intimidation and oppression. In any case, unions are majorly intended to promote workers welfare usually. 
Wal-Mart not only disillusions small mom and pop business whenever it comes to a new town but also does very little to bolster the local economy. From a short term, perspective, some people may believe that the incoming of the chain store amounts to the creation of jobs among other benefits (Jantzen, Pescatrice and Braunstein 62). Unfortunately, oppressive workers policies still apply in the new location and became detrimental after a short while. According to an earlier study by Jared Cram, Wal-Mart is cases a net loss in all societies it moves to. The influx of such large “big box retailers” was estimated to cost more $9 million in health costs, loss of jobs, and retirement benefits (Wellum 236). The impact is usually high that make up efforts such as increasing sales and property taxes are seldom satisfactory because of unsustainable economic models developed in these communities. 
Wal-Mart is notorious for using cheap foreign labor and even child labor to realize cheap production costs. Also, reports indicate that more than 50% of the raw materials and goods are imported from overseas suppliers, which amounts to taking away jobs and opportunities from the American community (O'Gorman 276). This causes a decline in business for the American suppliers who are forced to meet the company’s hefty supply demands. Worst still, Wal-Mart has occasionally been accused and criticized for paying off officials in some of its foreign companies in the attempt to conceal crucial information about its inappropriate operations, usually to the disadvantage of the American community and economy. Many of the store’s outlets, however, depict a grim picture all the same.
Wal-Mart has a history of failing to ensure workers’ safety, which has led to multiple suits in court. Suits persisted for many years until lately in 2013 when the management gave in to the society’s pressure and agreed to improve its safety standards in compliance with the Occupational Safety Health Administration demands for better standards in New York based stores (O'Gorman 276). Unsafe working settings still characterize overseas stores. A notorious example of the unsafe practices includes night lock-ins where workers are locked overnight at some of the Wal-Mart stores and factories to be retained even for more hours than appropriate (Jantzen, Pescatrice and Braunstein 63). Much as these malpractices are not happening in the American soil, they completely make the company an inappropriate partner for disappointing international workers’ rights. 
Besides the mistreatment of employees and unsafe work environments, Wal-Mart steals the employees’ wages. At some time in Chicago, the company forced employees to pay for their uniform contrary to the company’s norm of buying the attire for workers. The history of cases where workers sued the corporation for forced and unpaid working breaks and mealtimes is evidence that the company forced workers to offer unpaid services, which translates to wage theft. The 2002 and 2011 cases turned out as a class action as workers joined hands in the action suit because they share similar experiences of forced and unpaid overtime (Wellum 238). The unfolding of these litigations reveals that wage theft dominated as the court ruled for the workers. Wal-Mart was forced to pay up to $151 million to the workers as the compensation for the unpaid dues (Wellum 239). Certainly, the management personnel must have been conscious that the company was preying on the employees by failing to compensate duly.
Wal-Mart is uncandid to Americans for its tendency to lobby for policies in its favor while demonstrating little concern and interest in the welfare of the majority. In fact, the company makes the increasing inequality appear as the norm. In a report by the non-profit Center for Responsive Politics, the giant corporation spent $7.8 million lobbying in 2011 (Wellum 241). Surprisingly, the money was used to lobby for several legislations: promoting cuts on corporate tax, opposing a bill that guaranteed paid sick leave for employees, and trade policy. The 2011 incidence is nothing new since the company has a history of lobbying for an easy push of jobs out of the country. From an analytical perspective, the company is up to ensuring that the Walton family remains the richest whereas the rest of the US population continues to drag in poverty. 
In overview, Wal-Mart as a major employer and one of the American companies making enormous profits is not doing the best it should do for the economy and society. For instance, the company is known for the oppression of workers, which extends beyond unsafe working environments to wage theft. Further, the company deprives the society work opportunities by outsourcing cheaper labor and resources from overseas suppliers. Since the incorporation is powerful that it squeezes its competitors out of business with ease, it would be appreciable to support good manufacturing practices, better wages, employee policies, and lobby for favorable business related policies instead. Consequently, the inequality gap would gradually reduce since the retail giant would have set and maintained an American economy that would manufacture and retail goods and services to the advantage of all stakeholders.
 
Works Cited
Jantzen, Robert, Donn Pescatrice and Andrew Braunstein. "Wal-Mart and the US Economy." Eastern Econommic Journal (2014): 61-65. Document.
O'Gorman, Melanie. "Wal-Mart: The Face of 21st Century Capitalism." Labor (2013): 276-278. Document.
Wellum, Caleb. "Wal-Mart and the historians: a review." Journal of Historical Research in Marketing (2011): 234-243. Document.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiflae (talk • contribs) 18:48, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Walmart Ain't Good for America 

message: Elizabeth II has reigned for longer than Victoria did, so the remarks about the post box having been invented only 'halfway' (earlier than that, actually) through VR's reign are unnecessary.Snugglepuss (talk) 21:36, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Length of monarchs' reigns