If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Walmart CEO says that Walmart does pay a living wage. And by 'living wage' he means 'enough money for a cardboard box and a can of Alpo'   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 269
    More: Unlikely, CEO, Mario Draghi, U.S. Federal Reserve, Melinda Gates, bulk box, Politics of Italy, average wage, Communist Party of China  
•       •       •

2546 clicks; posted to Business » on 14 Dec 2012 at 9:39 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



269 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-14 11:32:07 AM

DirkValentine: slayer199: Giltric: People either go out and get a 2nd job to pay for classes that might increase their skillset or they sit around waiting for someone else to make that happen for them.

At some point people need to be personally responsible for themselves. It's not the government's job to give them more money (despite what some may think), nor is it a company's responsibility to pay them a "living wage." If you can make more money compliments of minimum wage hikes without obtaining a valuable skill or improving your education, where is the incentive to better yourself?

The minimum wage is a crutch, not an incentive.

And what do you suggest for people that have little skills, have had little to no exposure to a decent education (or are well below average IQ), have been laid off and need work to live?


Costco pays benefits and $17 an hour. WalMart could pay benefits if it wanted. And stop shoving their employees health care costs out onto the public to cover, i.e. to us. But it won't, cause Walmart is run by a bunch of cheap Republican asshat bastards.
 
2012-12-14 11:36:34 AM
What you people are shrieking about Wal-Mart not paying is not a "living wage." It is a "comfort wage."

I've worked full time at Wal-Mart three times in my (younger) life, on a couple of floor positions (including cashier). They paid more than numbers given to me from every other grocery store (Kroger, Target, Publix) and every fast food place I applied to (too many to list). Where is the outrage for all of those places?

Have you considered what happens when there aren't any cheap groceries or cheap food because labor costs raises prices? Everyone loses money. Not "cash", but "purchasing power" -- it goes down because you $30k/yr buys half as many burgers as it used to, and that goes for the poor people, too. They get poorer, not richer.
 
2012-12-14 11:36:34 AM
The really sad thing is that the cost increases that would result from paying a decent wage and providing benefits is miniscule.

Papa John's has been refusing to give their employees healthcare to increase profits by $0.11 to $0.14 per pizza by their own admission.
 
2012-12-14 11:37:02 AM
Hey, you can live pretty cheap outdoors.
media.peopleofwalmart.com
 
2012-12-14 11:38:41 AM

MugzyBrown: making just over minimum wage I had 3 roomates in a 2 bedroom apartment. Splitting rent and utilities and basic food 4 ways makes i


My first year in grad school I rented a room in a four-bedroom apartment for $350 with all utilties included. I lived on Ramen and Totino's Pizza and probably lived on less than $500/month.

That said, had I not been on my parents' health insurance I would have been struggling a bit. I think fixing the health care issues would go a long way to making crappy paying jobs a little more bearable.
 
2012-12-14 11:38:50 AM

Giltric: Okay so lets say you are right.....walmart now bumps every skill less drone up to 10$ an hour......now what do you do about all the people with minor skills who are making 10$ an hour....their skill just became worth more if skill less people are getting paid 10.....where do you bump them up to.. 15?,,,now what about all the people making 15$ an hour?


People can negotiate for wages based on the new minimum. No further thought required.

Giltric: Don't t give me the bullscat about schedules, people have been making it happen for decades.....you either make it happen or you wait for someone to make it happen for you....which person do you think succeeds?


You'll get schedules because it's the truth. Wal-Mart is notorious for bad scheduling. I've seen it in other retailers. You're available 24/7 or you simply don't get hours. If your second job tries to pull the same shiat, there's no point to having a second job. There's the ever popular "Work someplace else." but that doesn't work when A) We're talking about Wal-Mart to begin with and B) Wal-Mart is the nation's largest employer.
The whole point is that it's made much more difficult than it should be. There is no "day shift". you can pick up leaving your nights free. You work for Wal-Mart. 24/7. If they want you Tuesday night, Sunday morning, and Wednesday afternoon, you're there or you're out of a job, and it changes every week with no rhyme or reason.

Giltric: If a wal mart employee makes so little that they qualify for public assistance wouldn;t they also make so little that they qualify for grants and financial aid in order to go to school and better their skillset?


Perhaps. Grants didn't come close to paying for my schooling, however, and again you run into problems with school conflicting with work. You still need to make enough money to survive while going to school. This becomes increasingly impossible for people with dependents, without transportation, etc. It's not as simple as "Just go to college, dumbass. Stop being lazy."
 
2012-12-14 11:40:40 AM

Dr Dreidel: Because every child is planned, and there are no social pressures against getting/using contraception or pressure to carry a pregnancy to term. Nope, no social pressure and no political/legal consequences of it.


And no one with kids ever loses their good job and still has to make ends meet.
 
2012-12-14 11:43:24 AM

Dokushin:
Have you considered what happens when there aren't any cheap groceries or cheap food because labor costs raises prices? Everyone loses money. Not "cash", but "purchasing power" -- it goes down because you $30k/yr buys half as many burgers as it used to, and that goes for the poor people, too. They get poorer, not richer.


So are you willing to work for minimum wage at your current job so people can better afford your company's good and services?
 
2012-12-14 11:44:15 AM

Dr Dreidel: Because every child is planned, and there are no social pressures against getting/using contraception or pressure to carry a pregnancy to term. Nope, no social pressure and no political/legal consequences of it.


You're going with the "social/political pressure" excuse? That's amusing.
 
2012-12-14 11:48:06 AM

tbhouston: If you don't feel you get paid enough to push buttons of move boxes around....GET A BETTER JOB OR MAYBE A SKILL


When working at the busiest store in your town means you're in an idiot for working a terrible job then your country is in trouble.
 
2012-12-14 11:50:42 AM

Sergeant Grumbles: And no one with kids ever loses their good job and still has to make ends meet.


Yes about 18 years ago, I had to make a career change and I had no idea what I was going to do. I worked 2 jobs (bartending and pizza delivery) and averaged about 70 hours a week. I rented a house with a roommate and was paying child support while I interviewed for a number of tech-based jobs. I did that for 2 years. Once I got my first IT job (at $12/hr), I kept moving up...learning new skills, changing jobs fairly frequently, and finishing my college degree.

Is it possible? Yes. Is it damn hard? Yes. Point is that there are many people that are willing to settle....and way too many people willing to let people settle. As for those with lesser IQs or physical ailments, we already have government programs designed to help them. For those that aren't willing to do what's necessary to get ahead...that's not my problem. Yes, I got mine so screw them...because I farking earned it.
 
2012-12-14 11:51:26 AM

GoldSpider: Dr Dreidel: Because every child is planned, and there are no social pressures against getting/using contraception or pressure to carry a pregnancy to term. Nope, no social pressure and no political/legal consequences of it.

You're going with the "social/political pressure" excuse? That's amusing.


You're free to go with the other stated "excuse" from the thread (that people with kids are not insulated against losing a job, having an investment fail, or the like). Or make one up for yourself. That's the beauty in the stupidity of the original claim - there are tens or hundreds or even thousands of scenarios in which someone with a kid or expecting a kid can go from "financial stability" to "financial laughingstock" absent poor decision-making on their part.
 
2012-12-14 11:51:48 AM

slayer199: DirkValentine: And what do you suggest for people that have little skills, have had little to no exposure to a decent education (or are well below average IQ), have been laid off and need work to live?

Are you suggesting that a majority of people making minimum wage are incapable of doing better?


Is that what my question implied, asshat? How about you try giving an honest answer without obfuscation so we can move forward?
 
2012-12-14 11:53:18 AM

Dr Dreidel: You're free to go with the other stated "excuse" from the thread (that people with kids are not insulated against losing a job, having an investment fail, or the like).


"I'm unemployed with kids because I lost my job" is perfectly valid. "I'm unemployed with kids because there are social/political pressures against abortion and contraception" is not.
 
2012-12-14 11:54:20 AM

slayer199: Sergeant Grumbles: And no one with kids ever loses their good job and still has to make ends meet.

Yes about 18 years ago, I had to make a career change and I had no idea what I was going to do. I worked 2 jobs (bartending and pizza delivery) and averaged about 70 hours a week. I rented a house with a roommate and was paying child support while I interviewed for a number of tech-based jobs. I did that for 2 years. Once I got my first IT job (at $12/hr), I kept moving up...learning new skills, changing jobs fairly frequently, and finishing my college degree.

Is it possible? Yes. Is it damn hard? Yes. Point is that there are many people that are willing to settle....and way too many people willing to let people settle. As for those with lesser IQs or physical ailments, we already have government programs designed to help them. For those that aren't willing to do what's necessary to get ahead...that's not my problem. Yes, I got mine so screw them...because I farking earned it.


Tell, us do you spit on the guy who delivers your Pizza so he knows what a loser you think he is? Do you tell all the people at the stores you shop at how superior you are and what pathetic scum they are.? It seems it's the responsibility of an elite like you to make sure that the low lifes who labor to serve your needs know how unworthy they are.
 
2012-12-14 11:57:43 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: Tell, us do you spit on the guy who delivers your Pizza so he knows what a loser you think he is? Do you tell all the people at the stores you shop at how superior you are and what pathetic scum they are.? It seems it's the responsibility of an elite like you to make sure that the low lifes who labor to serve your needs know how unworthy they are.


I took the complete opposite from his post, so I don't know wtf you were reading...
 
2012-12-14 11:59:06 AM

GoldSpider: Dr Dreidel: You're free to go with the other stated "excuse" from the thread (that people with kids are not insulated against losing a job, having an investment fail, or the like).

"I'm unemployed with kids because I lost my job" is perfectly valid. "I'm unemployed with kids because there are social/political pressures against abortion and contraception" is not.

WhyteRaven74: Which is great unless you happen to have kids
MugzyBrown: Sounds like a poor life decision to have kids if you're making $6 per hour


"I had a kid because when I got pregnant, there was no safe and legal way for me to get an abortion, absent abandoning my home, my job and my family to cross state lines (300 miles away) to make the initial appointment and then again to get there 3 days later to have the procedure. I got pregnant in the first place because the Catholic who owns the butcher shop where I work refused to pay for BC, the Muslim who owns the chain of pharmacies in my town refused to stock or sell condoms, and 'the rhythm method' (suggested to me by my Baptist doctor) is only 50% effective."

Not valid?

// no one is claiming that's the only scenario, though - just that it's possible
 
2012-12-14 12:01:22 PM

Dr Dreidel: "I had a kid because when I got pregnant, there was no safe and legal way for me to get an abortion, absent abandoning my home, my job and my family to cross state lines (300 miles away) to make the initial appointment and then again to get there 3 days later to have the procedure. I got pregnant in the first place because the Catholic who owns the butcher shop where I work refused to pay for BC, the Muslim who owns the chain of pharmacies in my town refused to stock or sell condoms, and 'the rhythm method' (suggested to me by my Baptist doctor) is only 50% effective."

Not valid?


Yeah, I bet that happens like four-dozen times an hour.
 
2012-12-14 12:07:31 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: Tell, us do you spit on the guy who delivers your Pizza so he knows what a loser you think he is? Do you tell all the people at the stores you shop at how superior you are and what pathetic scum they are.? It seems it's the responsibility of an elite like you to make sure that the low lifes who labor to serve your needs know how unworthy they are.


Actually, no. I've helped some people I've run into while shopping get into the field (most recently a guy I met last year that was working at Best Buy that explained he couldn't get a foot in the door in IT). I've helped plenty of people get better jobs through my network...it's up to them to run with it. I'm MORE than willing and able to help those that will help themselves...but I have zero pity for people that will sit around and feel sorry for themselves rather than taking responsibility for their lives.
 
2012-12-14 12:09:08 PM

slayer199: Sergeant Grumbles: And no one with kids ever loses their good job and still has to make ends meet.

Yes about 18 years ago, I had to make a career change and I had no idea what I was going to do. I worked 2 jobs (bartending and pizza delivery) and averaged about 70 hours a week. I rented a house with a roommate and was paying child support while I interviewed for a number of tech-based jobs. I did that for 2 years. Once I got my first IT job (at $12/hr), I kept moving up...learning new skills, changing jobs fairly frequently, and finishing my college degree.

Is it possible? Yes. Is it damn hard? Yes. Point is that there are many people that are willing to settle....and way too many people willing to let people settle. As for those with lesser IQs or physical ailments, we already have government programs designed to help them. For those that aren't willing to do what's necessary to get ahead...that's not my problem. Yes, I got mine so screw them...because I farking earned it.


Oh, really? name a couple of these programs and then let me know how to live a decent life on them.

Also - you are LUCKY to have made it through the bar/pizza thing to IT and then continue to move up. I guess you didn't have any sort of medical emergency (or did you have insurance?). Like you said, it only took two years of working 70 hours a week. Surely everyone is capable of that, right?

Your anecdotal evidence doesn't mean shiat and the fact that you are using your life story as a reason that people that don't "make it" are lazy, shiftless losers only speaks to your own selfish, ignorant mindset.
 
2012-12-14 12:09:27 PM

slayer199: Is it possible? Yes. Is it damn hard? Yes. Point is that there are many people that are willing to settle....and way too many people willing to let people settle.


You started so well, and then you blamed the poor for being poor.
It it possible? Yes. Is it hard? Yes. Is the difficulty justified? No.

And it's harder today. Don't give me this 18 years ago crap. 1994 was a golden age compared to today.
 
2012-12-14 12:11:14 PM

slayer199: Philip Francis Queeg: Tell, us do you spit on the guy who delivers your Pizza so he knows what a loser you think he is? Do you tell all the people at the stores you shop at how superior you are and what pathetic scum they are.? It seems it's the responsibility of an elite like you to make sure that the low lifes who labor to serve your needs know how unworthy they are.

Actually, no. I've helped some people I've run into while shopping get into the field (most recently a guy I met last year that was working at Best Buy that explained he couldn't get a foot in the door in IT). I've helped plenty of people get better jobs through my network...it's up to them to run with it. I'm MORE than willing and able to help those that will help themselves...but I have zero pity for people that will sit around and feel sorry for themselves rather than taking responsibility for their lives.


Your just unwilling for those people to have decent pay and benefits for the labor they do for you.
 
2012-12-14 12:18:34 PM

jchic: bingethinker: Alpo? They can afford brand name dog food? Luxury!

And they probably keep it in their refrigerator!


Nice
 
2012-12-14 12:20:12 PM

o5iiawah: If wal-mart paid cart wranglers $6/hr instead of $7.25, they might be able to hire a few more of them and some high school kids and low income individuals would gain market skills otherwise.


As others have said, that's just plain-old stupid right there.

Walmart is perfectly able to hire more high school kids right now. Millions and millions in profits to do it with.

They won't hire a single high school kid they don't have to. Just like they don't now. A WMT store manager is in fact supposed to cut headcount every single year, unless same-store sales are growing by over 10%.

If they can pay some positions at $6, they are about a billion times more likely to raise their quarterly dividend by 2 cents, raise some C-suite pay, and call it a day.
 
2012-12-14 12:23:51 PM

Sergeant Grumbles: slayer199: Is it possible? Yes. Is it damn hard? Yes. Point is that there are many people that are willing to settle....and way too many people willing to let people settle.

You started so well, and then you blamed the poor for being poor.
It it possible? Yes. Is it hard? Yes. Is the difficulty justified? No.

And it's harder today. Don't give me this 18 years ago crap. 1994 was a golden age compared to today.


a57.foxnews.com

And here's his Fark handle.
 
2012-12-14 12:26:00 PM

GoldSpider: I only support charity when compelled at the point of a gun.

We get it.


Not what I was getting at but nice try. Socialism/Marxism is a macroeconomic model. It's ridiculous to apply to an individual. Marxism deals with economics of society as a whole and not the individual profit/greed motive.

GoldSpider: It fails because it directly contradicts the most basic competitive drive to succeed that exists in every living thing.


The competitive drive to "succeed" is a joke. Its the drive for survival. The fact that you think the top tier of Wal Mart suits absolutely NEEDS millions and billions of dollars to survive is pretty farked up though.
 
2012-12-14 12:26:30 PM

o5iiawah: Wal-Mart's job as a business is to pay its employees a fair market rate for their labor, not to be a conduit to fulfill the lifestyle expectations of its employees.


Huh. To have a fair market rate for anything, you have to have people in a roughly equal bargaining position. An unemployed person who has a desperate, immediate need to pay rent is not in an equal bargaining position with the plutocrats who own Walmart. Maybe a fair market rate could be negotiated if the employees could somehow join to together for bargaining. I'm pretty sure the advocates of "free markets" are always in favor of that approach.
 
2012-12-14 12:30:55 PM

Communist_Manifesto: I love how we used to be all about prosperity for all Americans. Now prosperity is making minimum wage and using food stamps. Why do you people think this is the best we can do? How is this good? Walmart would be making exactly 0$ if it weren't for its employees, but god forbid they pay them what they're worth. That money is for the owners of the stock, not the people who actually do the work and provide their labor! You want to start a revolution, take away the ability of people to feel like they can live a decent life.


People still believe:
1 Supply side economics
2 They will be millionaires one day
3 You can just snap out of it and do better
 
2012-12-14 12:40:59 PM

FarkedOver: Stalin tried socialism in one country. It failed. Why? Because Socialism is a worldwide revolutionary movement. If you cannot ignite the world in revolution the capitalist will come back.


Stalin failed because of Capatilists?

I woudl love this history lesson.
 
2012-12-14 12:42:23 PM

Raoul Eaton: o5iiawah: Wal-Mart's job as a business is to pay its employees a fair market rate for their labor, not to be a conduit to fulfill the lifestyle expectations of its employees.

Huh. To have a fair market rate for anything, you have to have people in a roughly equal bargaining position. An unemployed person who has a desperate, immediate need to pay rent is not in an equal bargaining position with the plutocrats who own Walmart. Maybe a fair market rate could be negotiated if the employees could somehow join to together for bargaining. I'm pretty sure the advocates of "free markets" are always in favor of that approach.


I remember the first time I read a job application that stated "if you belong to a union we will not hire you". This was in an at-will state so it was no surprise that the employer was terrible.
 
2012-12-14 12:51:39 PM

liam76: FarkedOver: Stalin tried socialism in one country. It failed. Why? Because Socialism is a worldwide revolutionary movement. If you cannot ignite the world in revolution the capitalist will come back.

Stalin failed because of Capatilists?

I woudl love this history lesson.


He failed because he wasn't a Marxist at all really. Socialism is a world wide revolution. This revolution is aimed at destroying the capitalist class. Stalin basically said.... well we can coexist with the capitalists. In my opinion this bit him in the ass. If he was a Marxists or a Leninist he would have tried for more revolutions the world over. He did not. He only support regimes that were tyrannical rather than Marxist. Take for instance the Spanish Civil War. He only supplied the "communist party" in Spain (aka Stalinists). He did not lend support to anarchists or Trotskyist groups.
 
2012-12-14 12:55:08 PM

slayer199: Sergeant Grumbles: And no one with kids ever loses their good job and still has to make ends meet.

Yes about 18 years ago, I had to make a career change and I had no idea what I was going to do. I worked 2 jobs (bartending and pizza delivery) and averaged about 70 hours a week. I rented a house with a roommate and was paying child support while I interviewed for a number of tech-based jobs. I did that for 2 years. Once I got my first IT job (at $12/hr), I kept moving up...learning new skills, changing jobs fairly frequently, and finishing my college degree.

Is it possible? Yes. Is it damn hard? Yes. Point is that there are many people that are willing to settle....and way too many people willing to let people settle.


Would it have been possible if you got sick?

Would it have been possible if your child support was 2x,3x as much?

Would it have been possible if you were the sole caretaker?

For those that aren't willing to do what's necessary to get ahead...that's not my problem. Yes, I got mine so screw them...because I farking earned it.

You "earned it" by being lucky. Lucky not to have the things I mentioned above and by having parents that pointed you in the right direction.

I say this as someone who worked full time before going to college, paid for college myslef, paid off my college loans a few years out (and was making about 120k 3 years out of college, have since switched careers for a better quality of life), and knows I did that because I had a fair amoutn of luck.

I say this as someone who has their eyes open and knows how much more difficult that is to do today then it was 17 years agoe when I started college.
 
2012-12-14 12:58:03 PM

FarkedOver: liam76: FarkedOver: Stalin tried socialism in one country. It failed. Why? Because Socialism is a worldwide revolutionary movement. If you cannot ignite the world in revolution the capitalist will come back.

Stalin failed because of Capatilists?

I woudl love this history lesson.

He failed because he wasn't a Marxist at all really. Socialism is a world wide revolution. This revolution is aimed at destroying the capitalist class. Stalin basically said.... well we can coexist with the capitalists. In my opinion this bit him in the ass. If he was a Marxists or a Leninist he would have tried for more revolutions the world over. He did not. He only support regimes that were tyrannical rather than Marxist. Take for instance the Spanish Civil War. He only supplied the "communist party" in Spain (aka Stalinists). He did not lend support to anarchists or Trotskyist groups.


If he did what he did worldwide it would have been plagued with the exact same problems purges, famines, etc except ona much greater scale.
 
2012-12-14 01:00:35 PM

DirkValentine: Oh, really? name a couple of these programs and then let me know how to live a decent life on them.

Also - you are LUCKY to have made it through the bar/pizza thing to IT and then continue to move up. I guess you didn't have any sort of medical emergency (or did you have insurance?). Like you said, it only took two years of working 70 hours a week. Surely everyone is capable of that, right?

Your anecdotal evidence doesn't mean shiat and the fact that you are using your life story as a reason that people that don't "make it" are lazy, shiftless losers only speaks to your own selfish, ignorant mindset.


No medical.

Yes, there are plenty of people that are lazy and shiftless losers. I've worked with them, I've bumped into them, and I know more people like me...that worked overtime without pay...just for the experience and to build our reputations. I like to think everyone is capable...not as many willing.

Sergeant Grumbles: You started so well, and then you blamed the poor for being poor.
It it possible? Yes. Is it hard? Yes. Is the difficulty justified? No.

And it's harder today. Don't give me this 18 years ago crap. 1994 was a golden age compared to today.


I didn't start so well...working 2 minimum wage jobs and paying child support....was not fun.

I don't blame the poor for being poor. I blame them for ACCEPTING it. At some point the poor need to take responsibility for their situation. They accept it...and people like you are willing to give them excuses.

Where is society's responsibility? To help those that are physically and mentally incapable of helping themselves AND providing them with an education. That means ending social promotion. That means teaching critical thinking...challenging students. That means NOT teaching to a standardized test. That means every student should be able to read and write at grade level upon graduation.

It is harder today. Harder for college graduates to get experience.

Philip Francis Queeg: Your just unwilling for those people to have decent pay and benefits for the labor they do for you.


They can EARN it. Stop giving the poor a pass by saying, "Aww, they're poor...feel sorry for them...damn you Wal-Mart, raise their wages!" If you really want to help the poor, educate them...give them a skill that they can use in the marketplace. But stop making excuses for them.

But you guys are right...it is "The Man" keeping them down...but it isn't guys like me...it's guys like you that want to make excuses and blame people like me for working hard to be successful...but you won't lift a finger to help them get a better job, better education, or more skills. Unlike you enablers, I actually help some of these people by finding them entry-level work in my field...and give them technical and career advice. Some of them take it, some of them don't...and I'm proud of those that do. Those that piss away their opportunity (not calling in to work, calling in sick frequently, being late to work, not doing their jobs)...can suffer the consequences on their own. It's no longer my problem.
 
2012-12-14 01:01:16 PM

liam76: FarkedOver: liam76: FarkedOver: Stalin tried socialism in one country. It failed. Why? Because Socialism is a worldwide revolutionary movement. If you cannot ignite the world in revolution the capitalist will come back.

Stalin failed because of Capatilists?

I woudl love this history lesson.

He failed because he wasn't a Marxist at all really. Socialism is a world wide revolution. This revolution is aimed at destroying the capitalist class. Stalin basically said.... well we can coexist with the capitalists. In my opinion this bit him in the ass. If he was a Marxists or a Leninist he would have tried for more revolutions the world over. He did not. He only support regimes that were tyrannical rather than Marxist. Take for instance the Spanish Civil War. He only supplied the "communist party" in Spain (aka Stalinists). He did not lend support to anarchists or Trotskyist groups.

If he did what he did worldwide it would have been plagued with the exact same problems purges, famines, etc except ona much greater scale.


Stalin was a terrible leader and a terrible Marxist. Had Lenin survived he could have done the job much better.
 
2012-12-14 01:05:00 PM

theurge14: ox45tallboy: This is the biggest problem with Capitalism - there is absolutely no incentive to make others' lives better, and every incentive to take advantage of your position to make others' lives worse, even when it is for a comparatively tiny benefit to yourself. (I'm sure I would notice the difference between $16 million / year and $18 million, but not NEARLY as much as I would notice the difference between $18K and $25K.)

It used to work when employers had some shred of social obligations to the society that made their businesses possible. But that seems to have faded in the last 20-30 years when they installed the idea that SOCIALIZMZ BAD among the red-state peasantry. Something's gotta give.


And short-term profits have been placed above long-term viability. This has also brought about the vulture capitalists, who "maximize shareholder value" by blatantly robbing the pension funds and the like.

Doesn't Wal-Mart realize that these people will just turn around and spend the extra money they're earning at Wal-Mart? It's not like $15 /hr will sudden;y bring them into the fold of the middle class,but it will keep them off food stamps and Medicaid assistance that the rich Republicans are having to pay for.
 
2012-12-14 01:06:53 PM

slayer199: Philip Francis Queeg: Your just unwilling for those people to have decent pay and benefits for the labor they do for you.

They can EARN it. Stop giving the poor a pass by saying, "Aww, they're poor...feel sorry for them...damn you Wal-Mart, raise their wages!" If you really want to help the poor, educate them...give them a skill that they can use in the marketplace. But stop making excuses for them.


Right, laboring to serve your needs does not earn you decent pay and benefits. People should be eager to sacrifice for the honor of serving the needs of an elite like you. If this was a just nation the little people would pay for the honor of checking out a great man like you in the store. I mean what kind of nonsense is it that people think you should pay an extra $0.11 per pizza so that the guy who makes it can have health insurance.
 
2012-12-14 01:07:26 PM

Free Radical: Working at Walmart is a career choice?

Really?


Of course it's not.

When it's the only thing available, it's not much of a choice.
 
2012-12-14 01:09:18 PM

o5iiawah: Wal-Mart's job as a business is to pay its employees a fair market rate for their labor, not to be a conduit to fulfill the lifestyle expectations of its employees.


You're technically correct (the best kind, of course). However, when they control such a huge segment of the workforce that they decide the fair market rate, do you think they're going to decide higher or lower?
 
2012-12-14 01:09:49 PM

Three Crooked Squirrels: Stop shopping there.


Revenue and profits fall, costs get cut some more. Wages decline, people are laid off.
 
2012-12-14 01:15:48 PM

FarkedOver: liam76: FarkedOver: liam76: FarkedOver: Stalin tried socialism in one country. It failed. Why? Because Socialism is a worldwide revolutionary movement. If you cannot ignite the world in revolution the capitalist will come back.

Stalin failed because of Capatilists?

I woudl love this history lesson.

He failed because he wasn't a Marxist at all really. Socialism is a world wide revolution. This revolution is aimed at destroying the capitalist class. Stalin basically said.... well we can coexist with the capitalists. In my opinion this bit him in the ass. If he was a Marxists or a Leninist he would have tried for more revolutions the world over. He did not. He only support regimes that were tyrannical rather than Marxist. Take for instance the Spanish Civil War. He only supplied the "communist party" in Spain (aka Stalinists). He did not lend support to anarchists or Trotskyist groups.

If he did what he did worldwide it would have been plagued with the exact same problems purges, famines, etc except ona much greater scale.

Stalin was a terrible leader and a terrible Marxist. Had Lenin survived he could have done the job much better.


Do you have an example of Socialism that has worked, or any real-world evidence to support the assertion that simultaneous global adoption would generate some superior global market?
 
2012-12-14 01:16:41 PM

Giltric: Instead of using some arbitrary term like living wage why doesn;t anyone calculate what living expenses should be......


Should Walmart be paying a low skilled laborer enough money to buy a 300k$ house on a 30 year mortgage?

In all honesty shouldn't someone be looking for a job that pays them enough to buy that 300k house instead of expecting their walmart job to bump them up to that level?


Of course not! Therefore the alternative is to pay them such substandard wages that they must rely on government assistance for food and medical care.

You have posted a rather silly thought.
 
2012-12-14 01:18:37 PM

FarkedOver: The competitive drive to "succeed" is a joke. Its the drive for survival. The fact that you think the top tier of Wal Mart suits absolutely NEEDS millions and billions of dollars to survive is pretty farked up though.


No, I don't think the suits NEED to be so rich, and generally agree with you that executives are grossly overpaid. Just saying it's a natural drive, that in our opinion, could use a little restraint.
 
2012-12-14 01:22:56 PM

Dr Dreidel: In order to participate in Walmart's employee benefits plan, don't you have to work a full 40-hour week? Haven't they made a habit out of scheduling 35-hour weeks so that employees aren't eligible?


More than that, they've told employees scheduled for and working 40-hr weeks that they are in a "part-time position" and therefore not eligible for benefits.
 
2012-12-14 01:23:27 PM

GoldSpider: FarkedOver: The competitive drive to "succeed" is a joke. Its the drive for survival. The fact that you think the top tier of Wal Mart suits absolutely NEEDS millions and billions of dollars to survive is pretty farked up though.

No, I don't think the suits NEED to be so rich, and generally agree with you that executives are grossly overpaid. Just saying it's a natural drive, that in our opinion, could use a little restraint.


Restraint? No. It needs to be abolished. It's exploitation.
 
2012-12-14 01:25:38 PM

Dokushin: Do you have an example of Socialism that has worked, or any real-world evidence to support the assertion that simultaneous global adoption would generate some superior global market?


Sure, look at any employee owned and operated business. There's plenty that have flourished. During the Spanish Civil War whole towns were collectivized on the republican side. Sadly that all came to end when Franco and his capitalist-backed fascists staged a coup because they didn't like the way the vote went.
 
2012-12-14 01:27:16 PM

FarkedOver: Restraint? No. It needs to be abolished. It's exploitation.


Spoken like an abstinence-only sex education advocate.
 
2012-12-14 01:29:14 PM

Giltric: Okay so lets say you are right.....walmart now bumps every skill less drone up to 10$ an hour......now what do you do about all the people with minor skills who are making 10$ an hour....their skill just became worth more if skill less people are getting paid 10.....where do you bump them up to.. 15?,,,now what about all the people making 15$ an hour?


I love hearing the argument that Wal-Mart employees are "skill less" from the same people that believe we spend too much educating our population.

Do you really think the Chinese sweatshop workers who make the crap that is sold in Wal-Mart can read and follow written instructions, understand a Material Safety Data Sheet regarding cleaning chemicals, calculate percentage off when labeling product pricing, organize products based on size and weight, and operate the Telzon computer system used for stocking?

IF a person has a high school education and some basic common sense, they can understand being a stock clerk at a Wal-MArt. If not, they will not be able to do the job effectively. Calling them "skill less" because many Americans do share the same skills (but many do not) is rather silly.
 
2012-12-14 01:30:27 PM

ox45tallboy: Doesn't Wal-Mart realize that these people will just turn around and spend the extra money they're earning at Wal-Mart?


You going to outlaw Amazon.com and other online retailers?
 
2012-12-14 01:32:17 PM

GoldSpider: FarkedOver: Restraint? No. It needs to be abolished. It's exploitation.

Spoken like an abstinence-only sex education advocate.


I'm sorry I don't condone your "Free" markets. Free to screw over the masses that is.

You must make a helluva rapist.
 
Displayed 50 of 269 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report