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  
•       •       •

2543 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 01:32:41 PM

MugzyBrown: The term living wage is idiotic.

You can live off $6/hr working only 40 hours a week unless you make stupid life decisions... yes even in the city.


You heard it here first, ladies and germs...

A home with heat, and decent food are STUPID LIFE DECISIONS

$6/hr x 40 hrs. = $240/wk, or about $200 after taxes

Hope you don't need a doctor visit from getting sick from living in that cardboard box with no heat!
 
2012-12-14 01:35:51 PM

slayer199: 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: You ...


Your entire post is filled with fail.

Here's why :

- you posit that people that work at Walmart shouldn't accept it and should better themselves. what if they just aren't that smart? what if working the register and Walmart is at their level of skill - as in, that's it! They aren't farking lazy b/c they are obviously working. And guess what? We need people to work cash registers, deliver pizzas (i did all through college), bartend, sweep floors, pick up the garbage, etc. You are suggesting that all these jobs are shiatty and beneath you and that it's their "laziness" that prevents/stops/impedes/whatever them from "moving up". I hate to break it to you, but that is "up" for some people. A lot of people.

- You are super lucky about having no medical and not getting assaulted by a psychopath and having your face kicked in. That happened to me 3 years ago. Probably about 200K in hospital bills and 3 surgeries on my farking face.

- "But you guys are right...it is "The Man" keeping them down.." I haven't seen anyone saying "The Man". What I have heard people talking about is how companies, Walmart in this instance, are greedy pieces of shiat that leach off our society by not providing their employees with a living wage or provide health benefits. If we had single payer like every other civilized country in the world then *poof!* there's one MAJOR problem solved. And companies that don't pay a full time worker enough to support themselves without food stamps and living in a shiathole substandard apartment with 3 roommates should be brought to task.

No one is giving excuses. As i mentioned up thread - Do you think that American citizens working a full time (35+ hr/wk) deserves access to basic/preventive healthcare?

Do you think that someone that works for a company that can pay it's CEO 20 million dollars a year should have an obligation, be it moral or legal, to pay the people that provide the labor for said company a wage that is, oh, i don't know - twice the poverty level? That's still only about 23K or something a year.

Also - being poor in country and shuns public transit makes life pretty farking difficult.

Good for you on "making it" all by yourself. And now you can look at people who struggle, like you did but don't have the means or wherewithal to make it out of that social strata they exist in, and say, "fark you, work harder. it's your fault you work at a menial job and it's your fault your poor".

Pitiful.

Also, i wish i had the quote by that farker that said something along the lines of "Conservatives are willing to take away ALL social services to make sure that a couple people that are gaming the system don't get a handout they don't deserve. Progressives are willing to take that hit and make sure that the majority of the users of a social program (the ones who need it. THE MAJORITY) have access to them".
 
2012-12-14 01:42:52 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?


See: Europe, almost the entire continent.
 
2012-12-14 01:45:58 PM

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

You must make a helluva rapist.


There are ways to regulate and manage a capitalist system that doesn't disproportionately benefit the rich, but you seem more interested in codifying into law a belief system that is at odds with reality and human nature.

True believers of any denomination are amusing for a time, but eventually become insufferable. For now, you still amuse me, so please continue!
 
2012-12-14 01:47:23 PM

DrewCurtisJr: You going to outlaw Amazon.com and other online retailers?


As of right now, most people I know (I'm staying in Alabama) who work at Wal-Mart are living paycheck-to-paycheck and survive off of their employee discounts. I don't know of any (6 people) who shop online, as most do not even have a home Internet connection.

I realize that extrapolating this to all of Wal-Mart is rather silly, but I think my point stands that Wal-Mart's employee discount makes their products cheaper for their employees than competing stores. After all, low-income people will spend a high percentage of their income on food and basic household goods and necessities. The only reral competition Wal-Mart has around here for the business of their own employees is Dollar General, and that's mostly for cleaning supplies.
 
2012-12-14 01:47:26 PM

DrewCurtisJr: 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?


Is anyone talking about outlawing them?

I think people want to change their busniess practices that hurting Americans.

I heard some stroeis last year about shiatty things amazon was doing at their shipping/sorting facilities, but I believe they have been fixed as I haven't heard anything.
 
2012-12-14 01:48:12 PM

ox45tallboy: See: Europe, almost the entire continent.


Indeed, a shining example of fiscal sustainability.
 
2012-12-14 01:49:02 PM

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

You must make a helluva rapist.

There are ways to regulate and manage a capitalist system that doesn't disproportionately benefit the rich, but you seem more interested in codifying into law a belief system that is at odds with reality and human nature.

True believers of any denomination are amusing for a time, but eventually become insufferable. For now, you still amuse me, so please continue!


There's no such thing as a half-capitalist. You either are one or you are not.
 
2012-12-14 01:50:56 PM

FarkedOver: There's no such thing as a half-capitalist. You either are one or you are not.


So it's either 100% libertarian-utopia open free market economy, or 100% marxist-utopia government planned economy?
 
2012-12-14 01:57:30 PM

DirkValentine: Your entire post is filled with fail.

Here's why :

- you posit that people that work at Walmart shouldn't accept it and should better themselves. what if they just aren't that smart? what if working the register and Walmart is at their level of skill - as in, that's it! They aren't farking lazy b/c they are obviously working. And guess what? We need people to work cash registers, deliver pizzas (i did all through college), bartend, sweep floors, pick up the garbage, etc. You are suggesting that all these jobs are shiatty and beneath you and that it's their "laziness" that prevents/stops/impedes/whatever them from "moving up". I hate to break it to you, but that is "up" for some people. A lot of people.


Guess what, if that's their level of skill...that's their level of skill. There are already government and charities that help those that can't help themselves. But you're trying to suggest that the low end is really the majority as a way to justify higher wages for everyone. I'm going to state that I think those are a minority of people...not a majority. People of average intelligence can do well in learning a skill or obtaining an education.

- You are super lucky about having no medical and not getting assaulted by a psychopath and having your face kicked in. That happened to me 3 years ago. Probably about 200K in hospital bills and 3 surgeries on my farking face.

Certainly, I think there should be catastrophic medical care/insurance. I don't think anyone should be forced into bankruptcy because of medical bills. Shocking, right?

- "But you guys are right...it is "The Man" keeping them down.." I haven't seen anyone saying "The Man". What I have heard people talking about is how companies, Walmart in this instance, are greedy pieces of shiat that leach off our society by not providing their employees with a living wage or provide health benefits. If we had single payer like every other civilized country in the world then *poof!* there's one MAJOR problem solved. And companies that don't pay a full time worker enough to support themselves without food stamps and living in a shiathole substandard apartment with 3 roommates should be brought to task.

I'm tired of this living wage bs. It's not the government or an employer's responsibility to pay a living wage. It's up to the individual.

No one is giving excuses. As i mentioned up thread - Do you think that American citizens working a full time (35+ hr/wk) deserves access to basic/preventive healthcare?

Do you think that someone that works for a company that can pay it's CEO 20 million dollars a year should have an obligation, be it moral or legal, to pay the people that provide the labor for said company a wage that is, oh, i don't know - twic ...


I'm not a conservative...and truthfully, I hate the GOP. I'm not in favor of corporate welfare or their farked up social policies. I'm socially liberal, fiscally responsible.

Guess what, since the War on Poverty has begun, has the government done ANYTHING to help these people. Get a clue, you don't help them by giving them more...you help them by giving them less but giving them opportunity. biatching about the CEO of a company doesn't do anything to help people get ahead...it's finger-pointing. It's an excuse. Poor guy doesn't make money because CEO makes too much. The stockholders have a right to complain if they feel the CEO makes too much...the board has a right to complain...anyone else biatching is just wasting their breath.

I'm betting most of you ripping on my posts haven't really helped any poor in the real world...by giving them opportunity. I have...and most of you have no concept of reality. There will always be rich, there will always be poor. It's the people that are poor to lower-middle-class that just need opportunity to be successful that we should be focusing on...those that are poor and accepting you can't really help.
 
2012-12-14 01:58:42 PM

GoldSpider: ox45tallboy: See: Europe, almost the entire continent.

Indeed, a shining example of fiscal sustainability.


Yeah, because no one's hyperventilating about the US long-term financial stability, either...
 
2012-12-14 01:59:37 PM

ox45tallboy: As of right now, most people I know (I'm staying in Alabama) who work at Wal-Mart are living paycheck-to-paycheck and survive off of their employee discounts. I don't know of any (6 people) who shop online, as most do not even have a home Internet connection.


The only people I know who work at Walmart are teenagers, they all shop online. If walmart gave them a raise it would in no way be guaranteed to be spent at walmart.

liam76: Is anyone talking about outlawing them?


No. But if you say just give everyone a raise and it causes prices to rise I think it's been established that if people can find lower prices elsewhere they will spend there money there, because they just can't help being exploited by being offered rock bottom prices.

So it's not so simple.
 
2012-12-14 02:00:19 PM

slayer199: Guess what, since the War on Poverty has begun, has the government done ANYTHING to help these people. Get a clue, you don't help them by giving them more...you help them by giving them less but giving them opportunity. biatching about the CEO of a company doesn't do anything to help people get ahead...it's finger-pointing. It's an excuse. Poor guy doesn't make money because CEO makes too much. The stockholders have a right to complain if they feel the CEO makes too much...the board has a right to complain...anyone else biatching is just wasting their breath.


And yet, here you are biatching about the lower level employees wanting better pay.
 
2012-12-14 02:00:36 PM

GoldSpider: ox45tallboy: See: Europe, almost the entire continent.

Indeed, a shining example of fiscal sustainability.


Absolutely. It seems the more Socialist countries like Sweden and Finland are doing far better than the less Socialist countries like Greece and Italy.
 
2012-12-14 02:03:59 PM

Philip Francis Queeg:

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.


Not true. PJ has always offered health insurance to 100% of its corporate employees, including those in corporate-owned stores. Schnatter didn't say that's going to change; he just said it's going to cost 11-14 cents/pizza more and PJ will try to pass that added cost on to consumers.

Corporate has no control over franchisees' decisions on health insurance. In response to the question, "Wouldn't some business owners just cut people down (to) like 34 hours a week so they wouldn't have to pay for health insurance?" Schnatter's answer was, "That's probably what's going to happen. It's common sense. That's what I call lose-lose." Doesn't sound like he approves of the strategy or intends to follow it.

Read the question in its entirety; of course it's common sense to assume that some business owners are idiots.

I'll get outraged when PJ Inc. actually does something worth getting outraged about, or when other people spread falsehoods like yours.
 
2012-12-14 02:05:00 PM

GoldSpider: FarkedOver: There's no such thing as a half-capitalist. You either are one or you are not.

So it's either 100% libertarian-utopia open free market economy, or 100% marxist-utopia government planned economy?


Nope. I'm saying even the liberalist libby that ever libbed is still a capitalist.
 
2012-12-14 02:06:55 PM

liam76: You "earned it" by being lucky. Lucky not to have the things I mentioned above


Why is he lucky? Why arent those people unlucky?

Are you trying to claim that paying child support, being sole caretaker and getting cancer all at the same time is the norm?
 
2012-12-14 02:17:46 PM

slayer199: uess what, since the War on Poverty has begun, has the government done ANYTHING to help these people. Get a clue, you don't help them by giving them more...you help them by giving them less but giving them opportunity.


that's b/c our "war" on poverty is pathetic and people like you saying shiat like this poison the well of ideas on how to really solve it with a more aggressive program.
 
2012-12-14 02:25:23 PM
QFT

Raoul Eaton: 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 only wish I could "Smart" this comment eleventy brazillion times.

/Newsletter &tc.
 
2012-12-14 02:37:14 PM

slayer199: I'm tired of this living wage bs. It's not the government or an employer's responsibility to pay a living wage. It's up to the individual.


Either you accept that the poor should die in the street, or you accept that you're going to pay for their survival via wages or taxes. Pick one of the three.
I think it should be wages. There's no reason Wal-Mart should get to use Medicaid, Food Stamps, and any other welfare program to subsidize their employees.

Let me just ask you, do you think everyone in the U.S. is capable of providing themselves a living wage, whether through education or whatever else? None of this "It's possible." none of this "I did it.", can everyone do it?
Do you really think the only reason people toil at Wal-Mart is because they refuse to aspire to more?
Do you think the way upwards is as straightforward as "Work harder."?
 
2012-12-14 02:37:52 PM
Fark me and striking out everyone instead of underlining.
 
2012-12-14 02:46:32 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: 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.


Nope. Totally wrong.
Can't you people read?


Link

Found that with one Google.
 
2012-12-14 03:05:57 PM

Sergeant Grumbles: slayer199: I'm tired of this living wage bs. It's not the government or an employer's responsibility to pay a living wage. It's up to the individual.

Either you accept that the poor should die in the street, or you accept that you're going to pay for their survival via wages or taxes. Pick one of the three.
I think it should be wages. There's no reason Wal-Mart should get to use Medicaid, Food Stamps, and any other welfare program to subsidize their employees.

Let me just ask you, do you think everyone in the U.S. is capable of providing themselves a living wage, whether through education or whatever else? None of this "It's possible." none of this "I did it.", can everyone do it?
Do you really think the only reason people toil at Wal-Mart is because they refuse to aspire to more?
Do you think the way upwards is as straightforward as "Work harder."?


My question is how do you define "living wage"? I mean this in all seriousness. Should a living wage allow a person to buy a house? To rent on their own? To support themselves only or to support a spouse or raise a family too?

As I mentioned above, I spent about a year living on roughly $600/month. How? I rented cheaply with multiple roommates and subsisted on Ramen, sandwiches, and Totino's pizza. It wasn't a very fun year (mostly thanks to my roommates), though thankfully my rent included cable and internet so it wasn't as bad as it could have been.

Now here's where it comes to the crux of your question. Is everybody capable of providing themselves a wage to live like I did? Absolutely. That's working at minimum wage for about 20 hours/week. Even figuring in taxes, minimum wage is enough for a single person to live (not live well or even average, but still subsist) outside of maybe the most expensive cities in the country.

And as I said above, none of this counts health care, which is its own particular problem.
 
2012-12-14 03:06:58 PM

DirkValentine: slayer199: uess what, since the War on Poverty has begun, has the government done ANYTHING to help these people. Get a clue, you don't help them by giving them more...you help them by giving them less but giving them opportunity.

that's b/c our "war" on poverty is pathetic and people like you saying shiat like this poison the well of ideas on how to really solve it with a more aggressive program.


How does extending social welfare create opportunity and an attitude of self-reliance rather than dependence? It doesn't.

Social Programs do nothing to ease poverty. Yet you want to add more?

People advocating more social programs are the problem, not the solution. You enable a self-defeating attitude rather than believing that most people are capable of more.
 
2012-12-14 03:09:11 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: slayer199: Guess what, since the War on Poverty has begun, has the government done ANYTHING to help these people. Get a clue, you don't help them by giving them more...you help them by giving them less but giving them opportunity. biatching about the CEO of a company doesn't do anything to help people get ahead...it's finger-pointing. It's an excuse. Poor guy doesn't make money because CEO makes too much. The stockholders have a right to complain if they feel the CEO makes too much...the board has a right to complain...anyone else biatching is just wasting their breath.

And yet, here you are biatching about the lower level employees wanting better pay.


I'm not biatching. I'm merely stating that people should be paid based on their value to a company, NOT an arbitrary number set by the government.
 
2012-12-14 03:15:42 PM

slayer199: How does extending social welfare create opportunity and an attitude of self-reliance rather than dependence? It doesn't.

Social Programs do nothing to ease poverty. Yet you want to add more?

People advocating more social programs are the problem, not the solution. You enable a self-defeating attitude rather than believing that most people are capable of more.


Subsistence farming, sweatshops and debtor's prisons for everybody!

/"Detroit" libertardian douchebag.
//Lemme guess: UAW and live in a lily-white Mt Clemens neighborhood.
 
2012-12-14 03:16:51 PM

Giltric: Why is he lucky? Why arent those people unlucky?

Are you trying to claim that paying child support, being sole caretaker and getting cancer all at the same time is the norm?


Luck is a subjective concept frequently used to avoid responsibility.
 
2012-12-14 03:17:01 PM
static.prtst.net
 
2012-12-14 03:19:11 PM

slayer199: Philip Francis Queeg: slayer199: Guess what, since the War on Poverty has begun, has the government done ANYTHING to help these people. Get a clue, you don't help them by giving them more...you help them by giving them less but giving them opportunity. biatching about the CEO of a company doesn't do anything to help people get ahead...it's finger-pointing. It's an excuse. Poor guy doesn't make money because CEO makes too much. The stockholders have a right to complain if they feel the CEO makes too much...the board has a right to complain...anyone else biatching is just wasting their breath.

And yet, here you are biatching about the lower level employees wanting better pay.

I'm not biatching. I'm merely stating that people should be paid based on their value to a company, NOT an arbitrary number set by the government.


Yes, people are just cogs. Easily replaceable parts with no more intrinsic value than a hammer. Elites like you have no qualms about working someone full time and watching them slowly starve as long as it was profitable. We must all keep our eyes on the highest priority at all times. I salute you and your heroic efforts to ensure that those at the bottom are viewed with the cold contempt they deserve, much like a piece of rusting machinery not worthy of maintenance. It is that spirit that makes thi9s country great.
 
2012-12-14 03:19:48 PM
My apostrophe jumped to the left. Sorry.
 
2012-12-14 03:20:17 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: Subsistence farming, sweatshops and debtor's prisons for everybody!

/"Detroit" libertardian douchebag.
//Lemme guess: UAW and live in a lily-white Mt Clemens neighborhood.


Thanks for for the ad hominem and ridiculous assumptions. You win the least intelligent comments in the thread prize. At least the others I've been debating with have attempted to make an argument.
 
2012-12-14 03:23:32 PM

slayer199: demaL-demaL-yeH: Subsistence farming, sweatshops and debtor's prisons for everybody!

/"Detroit" libertardian douchebag.
//Lemme guess: UAW and live in a lily-white Mt Clemens neighborhood.

Thanks for for the ad hominem and ridiculous assumptions. You win the least intelligent comments in the thread prize. At least the others I've been debating with have attempted to make an argument.


Not even when I attempt to stoop to your level can I win that prize.

/And that stab in the dark hit a little too close for comfort.
//St. Clair Shores, then.
 
2012-12-14 03:23:55 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: Yes, people are just cogs. Easily replaceable parts with no more intrinsic value than a hammer. Elites like you have no qualms about working someone full time and watching them slowly starve as long as it was profitable. We must all keep our eyes on the highest priority at all times. I salute you and your heroic efforts to ensure that those at the bottom are viewed with the cold contempt they deserve, much like a piece of rusting machinery not worthy of maintenance. It is that spirit that makes thi9s country great.


Yes, it's just the evil bourgeoisie keeping the proletariat at bay.

Unlike you, I actually contribute more than my taxes to the lower class by giving them opportunity. But please, continue to drone on with comments ripped from Marx.

What made this country great WAS opportunity....not handouts.
 
2012-12-14 03:25:43 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: Not even when I attempt to stoop to your level can I win that prize.

/And that stab in the dark hit a little too close for comfort.
//St. Clair Shores, then.


Oh, what level is that? You still haven't made an argument...and logical fallacies (ad hominems) don't count.

And you're not even close to my location.
 
2012-12-14 03:28:15 PM

Three Crooked Squirrels: Stop sh


But that would require inconvenience and hardship. It' easier to just biatch.
 
2012-12-14 03:29:00 PM
accidentally the whole thing, I did.
 
2012-12-14 03:29:33 PM
 
2012-12-14 03:34:07 PM

slayer199: Philip Francis Queeg: Yes, people are just cogs. Easily replaceable parts with no more intrinsic value than a hammer. Elites like you have no qualms about working someone full time and watching them slowly starve as long as it was profitable. We must all keep our eyes on the highest priority at all times. I salute you and your heroic efforts to ensure that those at the bottom are viewed with the cold contempt they deserve, much like a piece of rusting machinery not worthy of maintenance. It is that spirit that makes thi9s country great.

Yes, it's just the evil bourgeoisie keeping the proletariat at bay.

Unlike you, I actually contribute more than my taxes to the lower class by giving them opportunity. But please, continue to drone on with comments ripped from Marx.

What made this country great WAS opportunity....not handouts.


Yes, If we could only return to the golden era of opportunity when the elites like you weren't shackled by having to pay their workers more than they were worth. Giving people "handouts" by adequately paying them for full time labor goes against everything that made this country great.

www.continuetolearn.uiowa.eduupload.wikimedia.orgwww.novanumismatics.comdepts.washington.edulive.drjays.com

Opportunity! Not handouts!
 
2012-12-14 03:35:52 PM

Sergeant Grumbles: Either you accept that the poor should die in the street, or you accept that you're going to pay for their survival via wages or taxes. Pick one of the three.
I think it should be wages. There's no reason Wal-Mart should get to use Medicaid, Food Stamps, and any other welfare program to subsidize their employees.

Let me just ask you, do you think everyone in the U.S. is capable of providing themselves a living wage, whether through education or whatever else? None of this "It's possible." none of this "I did it.", can everyone do it?
Do you really think the only reason people toil at Wal-Mart is because they refuse to aspire to more?
Do you think the way upwards is as straightforward as "Work harder."?


An honest answer to that question is yes, I think most people of average intelligence can do it if given a fair opportunity. Can they make six figures? Probably not...but they can earn a "living" wage.

And yes, I think a lot of people "settle" because working a minimum wage job is easy, it's comfortable, there's little responsibility, and it's easier to complain about what you don't have rather than working hard to improve one's station.

I think we should be raising expectations, believing that people are capable of more rather than saying they can't because they're poor. You apparently don't have the same faith in your fellow citizens that I do.
 
2012-12-14 03:36:47 PM

slayer199: Oh, what level is that? You still haven't made an argument...


That would make us even. Well, except for the parts where you lie through your teeth about social programs not alleviating poverty...

CCC
WPA
GI Bill
SNAP
Rural Electrification
Cooperative Extension

... and that whole stinking pile of "paid for value to the company".

Now where is that chart on productivity vs. pay?

Other than that...
 
2012-12-14 03:37:18 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: Yes, If we could only return to the golden era of opportunity when the elites like you weren't shackled by having to pay their workers more than they were worth. Giving people "handouts" by adequately paying them for full time labor goes against everything that made this country great.


Nice strawman.
 
2012-12-14 03:39:33 PM
There are several misconceptions layered into that article. First, subby he said "competitive' not "living" wage - which means it's in the same range as what 7-11 or K-Mart pays, not that it's sufficient to support a family on.

Second, the presumption that employees qualifying for food stamps is BAD is really confusing - that's what food stamps are FOR - for low-income individuals so they can save money on basic necessities. Food stamps doesn't mean homeless.
 
2012-12-14 03:40:23 PM

slayer199: Philip Francis Queeg: Yes, If we could only return to the golden era of opportunity when the elites like you weren't shackled by having to pay their workers more than they were worth. Giving people "handouts" by adequately paying them for full time labor goes against everything that made this country great.

Nice strawman.


What strawman? The minimum wage is a "hand out" that's destroying the country, right?
 
2012-12-14 03:40:42 PM

Sergeant Grumbles: o5iiawah: Minimum wage sets a floor for labor such that a company who has a $6/hr position either has to deduct pay from others to fill the need for the position or not hire the person altogether.

No. That is not how wages work. That is not how business works. That is not how reality works.
If a person does not bring more value to the company than they cost, they don't get hired. They don't takes wages away from everyone else to hire someone new.
Stop being stupid


If they are an essential employee they do. Wal-Mart needs a guy to come in at midnight and buffer the floor and can only pay him say, $6/hr since 99.5% of the labor pool is equipped to do the job. The value of that wage might be $6.hr but wal-mart is forced to pay them $7.50 due to a minimum wage law. Since they cant operate their store with dirty floors, the solution is to either raise prices or depress wages.

Communist_Manifesto: Walmart would be making exactly 0$ if it weren't for its employees


its employees would be making exactly $0 without wal-mart and since the average greeter, bagger or cart wrangler hasn't invested money in permits, land, equipment and compliance, they are paid a mutually-agreeable wage for their work. Any employee is free to leave wal-mart at any time and start a competing company.

ox45tallboy: 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?


They will decide lower just as the worker will want to make it higher. The problem is when you have a massive pool of labor that is equipped to do the job required of working at wal-mart, then Wal-Mart isn't forced to raise its wages since those who are unhappy with the wages can walk and be replaced by new workers. The solution then if you are a wal-mart employee desiring of a better wage is to set yourself apart from the labor pool by offering services that few others can, thus making yourself marketable and allowing you to demand a better wage.

A bagger making $10/hr can demand $15 but if they cant demonstrate that they add another $5 worth of value to the company, they will be replaced by someone who is unemployed and willing to work for $10. There's a reason economics is called the "dismal science" words like "fairness" "Justice" and "equality" are all well and good but simply dont apply to what we're dealing with.
 
2012-12-14 03:53:17 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: slayer199: Philip Francis Queeg: Yes, If we could only return to the golden era of opportunity when the elites like you weren't shackled by having to pay their workers more than they were worth. Giving people "handouts" by adequately paying them for full time labor goes against everything that made this country great.

Nice strawman.

What strawman? The minimum wage is a "hand out" that's destroying the country, right?


It is, because it sets an artificial price on wage and creates a floor whereby if an employee's value doesn't meet the wage, he will more than likely not be hired. "Worth" is an arbitrary term defined by two parties in a private negotiation. The notion that you or anyone else is equipped to decide this is farcical at best, though typical of the progressive mindset.
 
2012-12-14 03:59:48 PM

o5iiawah: Philip Francis Queeg: slayer199: Philip Francis Queeg: Yes, If we could only return to the golden era of opportunity when the elites like you weren't shackled by having to pay their workers more than they were worth. Giving people "handouts" by adequately paying them for full time labor goes against everything that made this country great.

Nice strawman.

What strawman? The minimum wage is a "hand out" that's destroying the country, right?

It is, because it sets an artificial price on wage and creates a floor whereby if an employee's value doesn't meet the wage, he will more than likely not be hired. "Worth" is an arbitrary term defined by two parties in a private negotiation. The notion that you or anyone else is equipped to decide this is farcical at best, though typical of the progressive mindset.


That's right. People are tools without intrinsic value, as I said. Do you care when you throw away a hammer? Of course not. Should you care if one of you human tools dies because they weren't useful enough? Certainly not. If you intervene it might have a bad effect on the other human tools. We need to stop being concerned about the basic needs of human tools.

I truly hope your employer has valued you properly and that you aren't destroying this nation by getting a "hand out" from them because they have overvalued you or considered you as anything worthy of more concern than an office chair.
 
2012-12-14 04:00:41 PM

o5iiawah: its employees would be making exactly $0 without wal-mart and since the average greeter, bagger or cart wrangler hasn't invested money in permits, land, equipment and compliance, they are paid a mutually-agreeable wage for their work. Any employee is free to leave wal-mart at any time and start a competing company.


How about this: The owners and Corporate officers of Wal Mart would make $0 without their employees. Now let's flip the script. Would employees make more than $0 without owners and corporate officers??

Why YES! YES THEY WOULD!! Imagine that! A worker does not need an owner!! HOLY SHIAT! What a revelation!
 
2012-12-14 04:02:31 PM

slayer199: Sergeant Grumbles: Either you accept that the poor should die in the street, or you accept that you're going to pay for their survival via wages or taxes. Pick one of the three.
I think it should be wages. There's no reason Wal-Mart should get to use Medicaid, Food Stamps, and any other welfare program to subsidize their employees.

Let me just ask you, do you think everyone in the U.S. is capable of providing themselves a living wage, whether through education or whatever else? None of this "It's possible." none of this "I did it.", can everyone do it?
Do you really think the only reason people toil at Wal-Mart is because they refuse to aspire to more?
Do you think the way upwards is as straightforward as "Work harder."?

An honest answer to that question is yes, I think most people of average intelligence can do it if given a fair opportunity. Can they make six figures? Probably not...but they can earn a "living" wage.

And yes, I think a lot of people "settle" because working a minimum wage job is easy, it's comfortable, there's little responsibility, and it's easier to complain about what you don't have rather than working hard to improve one's station.

I think we should be raising expectations, believing that people are capable of more rather than saying they can't because they're poor. You apparently don't have the same faith in your fellow citizens that I do.


I can agree with some of your statement. You talk about fair opportunity and most people if given an opportunity would climb out of being poor. I would agree. The problem nowadays is that opportunity is not there or available at all. Those who would excel and thrive are met with closed doors instead of open ones. What then I ask?

The problem with your thinking is that in your mind you say "Since I've made it, so can you! You just have to work at it! Look at me! I am living proof!" There are some people who have worked at it most of lives with nothing to show for it, but I'm pretty sure you would think they didn't try hard enough and that was the reason for their failures in life.
 
2012-12-14 04:03:52 PM
i149.photobucket.com
 
2012-12-14 04:39:31 PM

MmmmBacon: No, Walmart does not pay a living wage. My wife worked there for 13 years, and when she quit she was making a little over $13/hour. I asked her to quit because the job was horrible, and we didn't need her to work, since my employer actually pays a living wage. I make not quite $29/hour plus benefits, and can pay all of our bills on my income alone. That is a living wage in my area. $13/hour is a crap wage, but significantly better than most Walmart workers get, which is around $9/hour at best.


I make 10 an hour, part time, for prepping cultures for bio classes at Maryland. The idea that a full time worker would get paid less than that is actually offensive. I can barely support me in school on that, let alone a family.
 
Displayed 50 of 269 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report