A few things you would need to know about me before I began, I was born and raised in Warner Robins, Georgia. So basically I am a country girl. I enjoy traveling to other states and sandy beaches. Any place that has clear water and water sports I am there. My parents have been married for the past twenty two years raising four children. I am the baby girl of the family. I am very spoiled rotten. Anything I want from my parents I sometimes get.
I went to Lindsey Elementary school from first to fifth grade. A lot of the kids I went to school with in elementary school, I don't see them anymore. I prefer it that way. I don't like seeing old friends they always bring back things that were embarrassing. I really hated elementary school to be honest. I hated going out for recess and couldn't stand to play with other children. I would always stay inside and do more homework. I only had one best friend that stayed down the street and if I wasn't at her house than she was at mine. There were plenty of times where we would play in the dirt or try to eat it and I have more scratches on my body than I can count.
During my middle school years my best friend and I still stayed in touch. Even though we lived right down the street from each other we would still write each other letters. How lame can we get? In middle school I think that's when I started to make more friends and boys became more interesting. Many days of swimming in the pool and I enjoyed seeing the opposite sex. Music became more popular to me then. I think I started taking more of what I saw in the music videos and tried to use it in real life. I would say probably by my eighth grade year I grew out of that. I started to gain my self esteem. Watching my mother I learned a lot from her. She made me realize how arrogant some men could be.
By my ninth grade year I had my first boyfriend. I was fifth teen and he was twenty. That was ass backwards from the beginning of the relationship because of the age difference. He was my first love, if you want to call him that. Anyways you can tell didn't last. Life did go on. I moved on and found more intrest in biology and anatomy. That's what made me want to become a doctor or pediatrician. I love kids. Don't have any, but I plan to some day. Maybe after I finish school.
When I started college that was a big change. It's such a big transition from high school. It seems like one minute you're a child and in a couple of months you become an adult. That's almost scary. I like being in college though. You have your own freedom and you become your own boss. I am a strong believer in not giving up. There are like two classes that I won't pass this semester, but I still come to class anyways. I might learn from my mistakes this semester and correct them next year. I planned on attending Emory university, but I don't think my SAT scores or my money were good enough. Maybe sometime in the future that will happen. I enjoy attending Macon State. The school is just more strict than any other schoo I've known.
My goal for the future is to have my own doctor's office. I believe if I work hard enough and focus more it will be accomplished. Whether or not I'll get married and have kids that's hard to say. A husband and kids are both time consuming. I'm not sure if I'll have that time. Most doctor's I know work at least twelve hours or more, and don't get to spend time with their families. I figure at least if I have my own office I can create my own hours.
Now you know more about my life and the goals I hope to accomplish. They say the past makes you who you are today and i think my past help to make me a better person. I've learned from my previous mistakes and I'm learning from all.
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
The Right to Take another life
Topic: Alzheimer's Disease
How do I explain my emotions on taking another life? Someone dying from a heart attack or a stroke maybe is understandable right? It happens by nature. To lay your life in the hands of someone else is a different story. I disagree in a situation involving a loved one with alzheimer's. There is no real suffering. You're just not able to remember what happend.
First, I'm not sure how he killed his wife wether he put her to sleep or stabbed her to death. His reason behind it doesn't make sense. I'm sure he could have taken his wife to a nursing home or left her in the care of someone else. Killing her shows he has no feelings. Gilbert shows how humans really don't care. He killed his wife without even thinking about the reprocussions or crime being commited. You still have some peolple that have comitted the same crime and still don't recieve any punshminet for the crime they commited. Gilbert sets a crime for people that slaughter elder people. People in nursing homes think it's okay to treat elder's with disrespect or to take them out of their misery.
Another reason why I believe Gilbert reasons are all wrong. he says that his wife begged him to end her life. If my bhusband is not in his right mind how would I know if he actually meant what he said. Terri Schiavo was the same way. It was left in the hands of her husband and he made what he tought was the best decisions. What human being has that much power to take the right of another human being. Maybe a nursing home was the best decision for Gilbert's wife. I don't think Gilbert really thought that through.
Society doesn't seem to concern because half the people I asked don't seem to remember the case or Gilbert. As far as denying him clemency I think he deserved what he got. Why would you protect someone that kills someone whose not in their right mind. I wouldn't even think about protecting someone. Our law has that right to step in on a situation like that. I agree the law did the right thing but they could have done more. Gilbert should have been sentenced to life in jail.
How do I explain my emotions on taking another life? Someone dying from a heart attack or a stroke maybe is understandable right? It happens by nature. To lay your life in the hands of someone else is a different story. I disagree in a situation involving a loved one with alzheimer's. There is no real suffering. You're just not able to remember what happend.
First, I'm not sure how he killed his wife wether he put her to sleep or stabbed her to death. His reason behind it doesn't make sense. I'm sure he could have taken his wife to a nursing home or left her in the care of someone else. Killing her shows he has no feelings. Gilbert shows how humans really don't care. He killed his wife without even thinking about the reprocussions or crime being commited. You still have some peolple that have comitted the same crime and still don't recieve any punshminet for the crime they commited. Gilbert sets a crime for people that slaughter elder people. People in nursing homes think it's okay to treat elder's with disrespect or to take them out of their misery.
Another reason why I believe Gilbert reasons are all wrong. he says that his wife begged him to end her life. If my bhusband is not in his right mind how would I know if he actually meant what he said. Terri Schiavo was the same way. It was left in the hands of her husband and he made what he tought was the best decisions. What human being has that much power to take the right of another human being. Maybe a nursing home was the best decision for Gilbert's wife. I don't think Gilbert really thought that through.
Society doesn't seem to concern because half the people I asked don't seem to remember the case or Gilbert. As far as denying him clemency I think he deserved what he got. Why would you protect someone that kills someone whose not in their right mind. I wouldn't even think about protecting someone. Our law has that right to step in on a situation like that. I agree the law did the right thing but they could have done more. Gilbert should have been sentenced to life in jail.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
All Things are Evil!!!
Topic:Norman Mailer
Something people use in everyday life is the word evil and basing judgment off of who sounds the best. As a country we feel threatenend not by terrorism but by others coming in and taking our place. Take someone that works for corporate America, works hard everyday, and invest their money in other stocks. If someone even says one thing about stocks crash they panic. Why? Because they feel threatenend. If you think about Jim, John, or Jeff their whole life was put in that stock investment. If the stocks crash then corporate America crashes. I think that's what Mailer was trying to say. America is based so much on capitalism that if something or someone comes into our nation or our lives we call it evil. When the truth is we're scared. If our lively hood is threatenend then we have nowhere to go or nothing to do because that was our life. If people spent less time thinking about themselves and more time cultivating with other people, this nation just might be alright.
Something else as a nation we have a bad habit of doing is we're not able to think for ourselves. Mailer pointed out in his book that Bush is not able to make decisions on his own. True enough you have other people in office that make decisions, but Bush has an opinion also. Bush doesn't give his opinion, his judgment is based who sounds better or who has the best voice. Most people are followers and not leaders. It's common for anyone to watch a music video or a movie and realize he may want to be like that person. He may dress like this person, act like this person, and even talk like this person. As a nation we have a hard time thinking on our own. We are so use to following this person or that person that we all become like robots. We don't know how to think on our own. We let other people control our thoughts and movements. We let others think for us. If Americans were all able to become leaders instead of followers it could be a good thing. Depending on how you use it.
Something people use in everyday life is the word evil and basing judgment off of who sounds the best. As a country we feel threatenend not by terrorism but by others coming in and taking our place. Take someone that works for corporate America, works hard everyday, and invest their money in other stocks. If someone even says one thing about stocks crash they panic. Why? Because they feel threatenend. If you think about Jim, John, or Jeff their whole life was put in that stock investment. If the stocks crash then corporate America crashes. I think that's what Mailer was trying to say. America is based so much on capitalism that if something or someone comes into our nation or our lives we call it evil. When the truth is we're scared. If our lively hood is threatenend then we have nowhere to go or nothing to do because that was our life. If people spent less time thinking about themselves and more time cultivating with other people, this nation just might be alright.
Something else as a nation we have a bad habit of doing is we're not able to think for ourselves. Mailer pointed out in his book that Bush is not able to make decisions on his own. True enough you have other people in office that make decisions, but Bush has an opinion also. Bush doesn't give his opinion, his judgment is based who sounds better or who has the best voice. Most people are followers and not leaders. It's common for anyone to watch a music video or a movie and realize he may want to be like that person. He may dress like this person, act like this person, and even talk like this person. As a nation we have a hard time thinking on our own. We are so use to following this person or that person that we all become like robots. We don't know how to think on our own. We let other people control our thoughts and movements. We let others think for us. If Americans were all able to become leaders instead of followers it could be a good thing. Depending on how you use it.
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
A Meaningless War
Topic: Why are we at War?
In my opinion I couldn't agree more with the points that Norman Mailer made. He made a very good points about President Bush. He argued that President Bush associates everything with evil. So if he believes that it's evil we should attack it. President is Bush is not the only one that does it also. If you think about it just about fifty percent of Americans have a habit of thinking something or someone is evil then we as a country should attack it. Why as a country should we feel threaten? I think because as Americans we are scared because it's something new entering our world and we don't know how to take it so we condemn it as all evil. President Bush feels threaten and he doesn't know how to react to certain situations. Norman Mailer made it clear when he pointed out that our president doesn't know how to think on his own. So he would hang around people and based on who sounded better, that's how he went with the better judgment.
The reason why we are still at war has no meaning anymore. I believe the reason why we are still fighting and what Mailer tries to point out has to do more with capitalism than with September eleven. Now in America everything is based upon money and how much we can make. It has nothing to do with the lives that were lost in the World Trade Center. True enough when September eleventh comes around people always remember the lives that were lost, but they don't mourn the way they use to when it first happenend. If some people in America weren't so based upon making money constantly then they wouldn't have reasons to spend long hours at work, instead they could spend more time at home with their families. Then again that's the way the world works.
In the future, I think we people will look back on the war in Iraq and wonder what the hell were we fighting for again. This war has no meaning to it. I don't think the war is going to end anytime soon and I don't think it's going to solve anything. Basically Bush is saying it's okay to kill little boys and girls, but let's also send food and clothes to Iraq to help out. Hello...we still have poor children here in America that need help. Can we work on our own country first before we hell anyone else?
In my opinion I couldn't agree more with the points that Norman Mailer made. He made a very good points about President Bush. He argued that President Bush associates everything with evil. So if he believes that it's evil we should attack it. President is Bush is not the only one that does it also. If you think about it just about fifty percent of Americans have a habit of thinking something or someone is evil then we as a country should attack it. Why as a country should we feel threaten? I think because as Americans we are scared because it's something new entering our world and we don't know how to take it so we condemn it as all evil. President Bush feels threaten and he doesn't know how to react to certain situations. Norman Mailer made it clear when he pointed out that our president doesn't know how to think on his own. So he would hang around people and based on who sounded better, that's how he went with the better judgment.
The reason why we are still at war has no meaning anymore. I believe the reason why we are still fighting and what Mailer tries to point out has to do more with capitalism than with September eleven. Now in America everything is based upon money and how much we can make. It has nothing to do with the lives that were lost in the World Trade Center. True enough when September eleventh comes around people always remember the lives that were lost, but they don't mourn the way they use to when it first happenend. If some people in America weren't so based upon making money constantly then they wouldn't have reasons to spend long hours at work, instead they could spend more time at home with their families. Then again that's the way the world works.
In the future, I think we people will look back on the war in Iraq and wonder what the hell were we fighting for again. This war has no meaning to it. I don't think the war is going to end anytime soon and I don't think it's going to solve anything. Basically Bush is saying it's okay to kill little boys and girls, but let's also send food and clothes to Iraq to help out. Hello...we still have poor children here in America that need help. Can we work on our own country first before we hell anyone else?
Monday, February 26, 2007
Topic: Alligator River
Gregory: I give Gregory a three. I understand him being upset with Abigail, but I don't agree with him casting her aside. He must understand the whole reason why Abigail slept with Sinbad in the first place. Instead of Abigail crossing the river, Gregory could have asked Sinbad to take him to see Abigail. Only in midevil times does the man fight to see the woman. If Gregory really loved Abigail the way he said he does then he would have fought to see her.
Abigail: I give Abigail a five. I don't agree with her going to such low terms just to see a man. I'm pretty sure there was another way around the river. Maybe she could have phoned Gregory instead of going to see him or she just could have waited until they built another bridge. I'm pretty sure Gregory wasn't going anywhere. Abigail sleeping with the Sinbad just degrades women even more. I don't agree with the reason why she slept with him. Just to see another man. Abigail just gave the definition to everyone of what a whore is. Why stoop to such low levels?
Ivan: I give Ivan a one. Getting in everybody's business is not a very good situation. If he were to get involved with Abigail's mess, who's to say the captain wouldn't ask to sleep with him also. So I think Ivan did the right thing by not getting involved.
Sinbad: I give Sinbad a five. Sinbad just shows what's on a male mind and they degrade females even more. Whatever happened to common courtesy or just doing someone a favor. Why would Abigail have to have sex just to get a ride.? It's obvious to me that the captain is one hell of a lonely man. It makes you wonder if he did that to other women who asked for a ride.
Slug: I give Slug a three. I'm not exactly sure where Slug comes in at. Whether he is a friend or if he is related to her. If he is family I understand him taking up for Abigail, but she put herself in that situation. So him going to jump Gregory was just a waste of time.
Gregory: I give Gregory a three. I understand him being upset with Abigail, but I don't agree with him casting her aside. He must understand the whole reason why Abigail slept with Sinbad in the first place. Instead of Abigail crossing the river, Gregory could have asked Sinbad to take him to see Abigail. Only in midevil times does the man fight to see the woman. If Gregory really loved Abigail the way he said he does then he would have fought to see her.
Abigail: I give Abigail a five. I don't agree with her going to such low terms just to see a man. I'm pretty sure there was another way around the river. Maybe she could have phoned Gregory instead of going to see him or she just could have waited until they built another bridge. I'm pretty sure Gregory wasn't going anywhere. Abigail sleeping with the Sinbad just degrades women even more. I don't agree with the reason why she slept with him. Just to see another man. Abigail just gave the definition to everyone of what a whore is. Why stoop to such low levels?
Ivan: I give Ivan a one. Getting in everybody's business is not a very good situation. If he were to get involved with Abigail's mess, who's to say the captain wouldn't ask to sleep with him also. So I think Ivan did the right thing by not getting involved.
Sinbad: I give Sinbad a five. Sinbad just shows what's on a male mind and they degrade females even more. Whatever happened to common courtesy or just doing someone a favor. Why would Abigail have to have sex just to get a ride.? It's obvious to me that the captain is one hell of a lonely man. It makes you wonder if he did that to other women who asked for a ride.
Slug: I give Slug a three. I'm not exactly sure where Slug comes in at. Whether he is a friend or if he is related to her. If he is family I understand him taking up for Abigail, but she put herself in that situation. So him going to jump Gregory was just a waste of time.
Tuesday, February 6, 2007
A growing community
Topic: Rights
To say the least when you have a clash between gays and straight people, I think that can become quite a problem. Most people straight people don't have problems with gay people it's a physological fact that they might try to come on to them. I don't think there would be anything wrong with someone gay teaching in school or becoming a role model to child if I had children. Just don't do inapporiate things.
For quite sometime now men on the down low and men coming out and saying they're gay has become more widespread. Some men and even women believe that they were born that way or because someone in the household that they looked up was gay, and made them want to become that way. I don't have a problem with anyone being gay or becoming gay, but just be civil about it. I don't think it's cool to kiss in public, because to me it just looks wrong. I perfer for people to keep it behind closed doors and I say that for staright people to.
Even going to school now has becoming a major issue, because a lot of kids get teased about being gay. Most of them are tormented by their bully because that's what they choose to be. In this country you have the right to choose who and what you want to be and I don't think the parents or gaurdins of the household explain that enough to their children. The last thing I would want is for my child to come home to me saying how he was jumped because some crazy child in school thought he was gay.
Another thing that we don't really explain to our children and something that they don't understand is why do I have two mommies or two daddies. I don't think it's our children's fault and they shouldn't be brought into a household like that. I don't agree with it, but if that's who you are then by all means do you. I'm not trying to knock anyone down, but that's just my opinion.
Since the 1060's the gay community has really grown and as americans we have no choice but to accept it and those around us. What choice do we have. I am not opposing anyone's decision, because that's who you are.
To say the least when you have a clash between gays and straight people, I think that can become quite a problem. Most people straight people don't have problems with gay people it's a physological fact that they might try to come on to them. I don't think there would be anything wrong with someone gay teaching in school or becoming a role model to child if I had children. Just don't do inapporiate things.
For quite sometime now men on the down low and men coming out and saying they're gay has become more widespread. Some men and even women believe that they were born that way or because someone in the household that they looked up was gay, and made them want to become that way. I don't have a problem with anyone being gay or becoming gay, but just be civil about it. I don't think it's cool to kiss in public, because to me it just looks wrong. I perfer for people to keep it behind closed doors and I say that for staright people to.
Even going to school now has becoming a major issue, because a lot of kids get teased about being gay. Most of them are tormented by their bully because that's what they choose to be. In this country you have the right to choose who and what you want to be and I don't think the parents or gaurdins of the household explain that enough to their children. The last thing I would want is for my child to come home to me saying how he was jumped because some crazy child in school thought he was gay.
Another thing that we don't really explain to our children and something that they don't understand is why do I have two mommies or two daddies. I don't think it's our children's fault and they shouldn't be brought into a household like that. I don't agree with it, but if that's who you are then by all means do you. I'm not trying to knock anyone down, but that's just my opinion.
Since the 1060's the gay community has really grown and as americans we have no choice but to accept it and those around us. What choice do we have. I am not opposing anyone's decision, because that's who you are.
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Airplane Attack
Topic: Hijack
In a situation regarding airplane hijack people always think the worst case scenairo. If the decision was left up to me, I don't believe in negotiating with terrorist. So no matter what the threat is I wouldn't let any convicted criminals go.
Compared to how the airline's work twenty years ago and how they work now, I think it's safe to say it would be a lot easier to take down a terrorist. Since the nine eleven attack in two thousand one our airports and securities are stricter. Most airliners have trained agents aboard and trained flight associates' aboard. I would make sure that the agents understand that the passengers come first, and it would be in the best saftey to get the passengers off as soon as possible.
It would be mandatory that the agents not allow letting their cover to be blown. There are several compartments to an airplane that allow passengers to sneak out. If there is a way to keep the terriorist occupied while some of the passengers attempt to sneak out. I wouldn't recommend all the passengers sneak out first just a few.
There are other ways of taking control of the situation by lying to the terrorist. If I was somehow to let the pilot know that by announcing to everyone on the airplane that a convicted criminal was just released, the terrorist could believe that. If they're up in the air, the terrorist really has no proof that someone was just released.
You can't negotiate with terrorist because if anything else were to happen to someone else in America then you would have to negotiate with every other terrorist that happens to make a threat or attempt to hijack an airplane. Negotiation is not an option. In cases like this I would let everyone to remain calm and never think the worst. There are other ways out of the situation.
Due to nine eleven and the way security works; I believe the possibilities of another hijack are five in ten. Precautions are still needed and choices still need to be made.
In a situation regarding airplane hijack people always think the worst case scenairo. If the decision was left up to me, I don't believe in negotiating with terrorist. So no matter what the threat is I wouldn't let any convicted criminals go.
Compared to how the airline's work twenty years ago and how they work now, I think it's safe to say it would be a lot easier to take down a terrorist. Since the nine eleven attack in two thousand one our airports and securities are stricter. Most airliners have trained agents aboard and trained flight associates' aboard. I would make sure that the agents understand that the passengers come first, and it would be in the best saftey to get the passengers off as soon as possible.
It would be mandatory that the agents not allow letting their cover to be blown. There are several compartments to an airplane that allow passengers to sneak out. If there is a way to keep the terriorist occupied while some of the passengers attempt to sneak out. I wouldn't recommend all the passengers sneak out first just a few.
There are other ways of taking control of the situation by lying to the terrorist. If I was somehow to let the pilot know that by announcing to everyone on the airplane that a convicted criminal was just released, the terrorist could believe that. If they're up in the air, the terrorist really has no proof that someone was just released.
You can't negotiate with terrorist because if anything else were to happen to someone else in America then you would have to negotiate with every other terrorist that happens to make a threat or attempt to hijack an airplane. Negotiation is not an option. In cases like this I would let everyone to remain calm and never think the worst. There are other ways out of the situation.
Due to nine eleven and the way security works; I believe the possibilities of another hijack are five in ten. Precautions are still needed and choices still need to be made.
Monday, January 22, 2007
Relativist in the Judicial System
Topic: Right or Wrong
When it comes to the judicial system and judging someone else's life it can become a problem to say the least. I don't agree that judging the punishment of a human life can be left up to another human being. If the prosecutor provides good evidence but it's false evidence against the defense team, should he or she be sentenced to life in jail? In this case it would be wrong.
Being a lawyer can be one hell of a job. You must examine your audience, trust that your client is telling the truth, and prove to the jury that your client is innocence. The defense team can provide great evidence and a good argument that is equally right, but not true. As a human race we think it's wrong to put an innocence man behind bars when we are the ones that made the decision in the first place to put him there. As a relativist both sides provide good evidence that is equally right in the judicial system, but has proven to American society that whether the evidence is good or bad as long as they have someone behind bars it's ok.
The judge plays an equal part in it as well as anyone else. The judge can decide if he feels both sides are out of line and if the defense team overrules the prosecutor or vice versa. The judge can be right in this situation, but should hear both sides out before overruling.
Next the person that is being convicted can put up a good argument, but not good enough to convince the jury. Due to the fact that the evidence pending against him decides how he spends that rest of his life in jail when he may not have been there at the scene of the crime. It is a proven fact that people can be framed for a crime that they did not commit, but due to the evidence is a sentence life in jail.
Being a relativist can provide good sides from both teams, but it's not always the correct evidence. As a human race we don't have that right to take someone's life by saying guilty or not guilty.
When it comes to the judicial system and judging someone else's life it can become a problem to say the least. I don't agree that judging the punishment of a human life can be left up to another human being. If the prosecutor provides good evidence but it's false evidence against the defense team, should he or she be sentenced to life in jail? In this case it would be wrong.
Being a lawyer can be one hell of a job. You must examine your audience, trust that your client is telling the truth, and prove to the jury that your client is innocence. The defense team can provide great evidence and a good argument that is equally right, but not true. As a human race we think it's wrong to put an innocence man behind bars when we are the ones that made the decision in the first place to put him there. As a relativist both sides provide good evidence that is equally right in the judicial system, but has proven to American society that whether the evidence is good or bad as long as they have someone behind bars it's ok.
The judge plays an equal part in it as well as anyone else. The judge can decide if he feels both sides are out of line and if the defense team overrules the prosecutor or vice versa. The judge can be right in this situation, but should hear both sides out before overruling.
Next the person that is being convicted can put up a good argument, but not good enough to convince the jury. Due to the fact that the evidence pending against him decides how he spends that rest of his life in jail when he may not have been there at the scene of the crime. It is a proven fact that people can be framed for a crime that they did not commit, but due to the evidence is a sentence life in jail.
Being a relativist can provide good sides from both teams, but it's not always the correct evidence. As a human race we don't have that right to take someone's life by saying guilty or not guilty.
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
Billion Dollar Industry
Topic: Perception
I was told before coming to work for Wal-mart, that's the place to make money, get more work hours, and build a career. Let me tell you folks, Wal-mart is not what it's made out to be!
Don't get me wrong I enjoy my job, but I don't get paid like everyone percieves. People would swear I was a living billionaire. I'm lucky if my pay check can see over three hundred fifty dollars. Just because Wal-mart makes a lot of money it doesn't go to the employees. In one day one register can make up to twenty thousand dollars. No employee is exactly sure where that money goes. You would have to ask management about that one.
When it comes to how many hours you get, it depends if you are full-time or part-time. If you are full-time you'll get all the hours you need and more. People view Wal-mart as having enough employees to cover all shifts. Wal-mart is understaffed. So if it says you are part-time, there is a good chance you will be working a full-time shift. You don't really have a chance to see your family because Wal-mart becomes your first home.
Wal-mart is a great place to build a career if you plan on staying there the next thirty years. I have seen people at the age of nineteen walk into the store and become a manger right away, but then you have people who have been there for the past fifth teen years and are still cashiers. It takes time and dedication.
Wal-mart is a great place to shop. Ask around first before you get a job there. It's not everything people make it out to be. Just ask the employees.
I was told before coming to work for Wal-mart, that's the place to make money, get more work hours, and build a career. Let me tell you folks, Wal-mart is not what it's made out to be!
Don't get me wrong I enjoy my job, but I don't get paid like everyone percieves. People would swear I was a living billionaire. I'm lucky if my pay check can see over three hundred fifty dollars. Just because Wal-mart makes a lot of money it doesn't go to the employees. In one day one register can make up to twenty thousand dollars. No employee is exactly sure where that money goes. You would have to ask management about that one.
When it comes to how many hours you get, it depends if you are full-time or part-time. If you are full-time you'll get all the hours you need and more. People view Wal-mart as having enough employees to cover all shifts. Wal-mart is understaffed. So if it says you are part-time, there is a good chance you will be working a full-time shift. You don't really have a chance to see your family because Wal-mart becomes your first home.
Wal-mart is a great place to build a career if you plan on staying there the next thirty years. I have seen people at the age of nineteen walk into the store and become a manger right away, but then you have people who have been there for the past fifth teen years and are still cashiers. It takes time and dedication.
Wal-mart is a great place to shop. Ask around first before you get a job there. It's not everything people make it out to be. Just ask the employees.
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
My name is Princess Harris. I was born in Warner Robins, Georgia. I was born September 21, 1987. For the most part I'm a pretty funny peson. I try to do things that will keep people laughing. In class I keep quiet, just to keep from getting in trouble. I'm a cashier at Wal-Mart on Waston Blvd. In my spare time I enjoy listening to music, playing the keyboard, and writing poetry. Although I enjoy making people laugh, I'm very shy. I won't speak to someone unless they speak first. So if you enjoy a good laugh e-mail me sometime at Anntonette06@aol.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)