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 59
    More: Unlikely, CEO, Mario Draghi, U.S. Federal Reserve, Melinda Gates, bulk box, Politics of Italy, average wage, Communist Party of China  
•       •       •

2547 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»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-12-14 11:18:15 AM  
5 votes:
We can discuss all day long what Wal Mart should or could pay their employees. The bottom line is that they are going to pay them the absolute minimum they can get away with. As long as they aren't violating and labor laws (or aren't getting caught violating any) and people are still willing to fill out an application and work there, wages will not go up. Period.

There are really only 3 ways to get them to increase wages and benefits. One is through legislation which, in my opinion, is the worst way to go about it. Legislation tends to be very broad and comes with a host of unintended consequences. That's not to mention the fact that it would be nearly impossible to pass anything meaningful in today's political climate, and whatever you could get passed would be so watered-down by corporate bribing lobbying as to be virtually worthless.

The second is through increased competition or an improved economy. If Wal Mart can't find people to work $8.50/hr. because everyone else is paying $10, their wages will go up. That's not likely to happen because, as someone else mentioned earlier, Wal Mart pretty much sets the bar here. If there were some sort of vast economic expansion and people were no longer trapped between taking a slave wage or living under a bridge, that would also do the trick. I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for that to happen.

The last way would be for the workers to unionize. That's going to be nearly impossible to accomplish as well. They could pull it off in some states, but in many states there are few protections for workers who choose to unionize. Right-to-work laws and an economy in the toilet will ensure that for every worker who decides to join the union and strike, there will be 3 people willing to take their place. The striking workers will simply be replaced by people too desperate to do anything other than play by Wal Mart's rules. They are simply too big, with too many employees spread over all 50 states.

The cold, hard truth is that for a company like Wal Mart, workers are just cogs in a machine - cheap and easily replaceable. If a cog can't afford to get its impacted tooth fixed and can't go to work because it's in too much pain, you simply replace it with another cog. If a light bulb burns out at your house, you don't spend resources trying to fix it or figure out how to improve the conditions the light bulb operated in and make investments to make sure that the next light bulb lasts longer. You go to Wal Mart, buy a package of cheap bulbs assembled in China, toss the old one in the trash and move on with life.

tl;dr - Wal Mart's pay and benefit levels aren't going anywhere for the foreseeable future. Enjoy your $5.00 pallet of lead-coated toilet paper.
2012-12-14 09:56:01 AM  
5 votes:
That's because in America the common man who used to root for this guy...
i.imgur.com

..now does everything he can to vote for and support this guy...
i.imgur.com 

You reap what you sow.
2012-12-14 10:26:27 AM  
4 votes:

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.


And by fair market you mean a revolving door of minimum wage automatons who have no other choice in their town because Walmart ran off all the other stores and they need (not want) to buy from the same store because their lifestyle expectations of paying rent and eating ramen noodles require it. In short, elimination of a middle class.
2012-12-14 10:24:09 AM  
4 votes:
Take away the taxpayer paid subsides for WalMart workers and see how much of a living wage that is. They are nothing but socialists, sucking off the government teat by having their workers rely on government handouts to stay alive.
2012-12-14 12:36:08 AM  
4 votes:
He said "competitive" wage, as in "it's about what everyone else in the industry pays". I don't think even $18.7 million would be enough for him to keep a straight face while calling it a "living wage".

When you ARE the industry, you are setting the standard, and everyone else competes against you. If they were to raise their wages, other retail stores would follow suit. But that extra $0.03 /share each quarter nets him another $2 million bonus*, so why bother? The people will work for crap.

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.)

*these numbers have been pulled out of my ass. Please feel free to substitute real numbers I don't feel like looking up right now and I guarantee that my point will still stand
2012-12-14 12:26:30 PM  
3 votes:

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 11:06:15 AM  
3 votes:
Globalization truly farked us. Until the race to the bottom in terms of wages finishes on a global scale (companies had there factories in mexico, then mexicans became to expensive so they moved to china, then when the chinese become too expensive they're going to move to africa) wages for labor are going to continue to decrease, while the already wealthy will continue to gain more and more of the pie.
2012-12-14 10:45:33 AM  
3 votes:

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.
2012-12-14 10:24:21 AM  
3 votes:
If it is a good wage, let him live off of it for a year
2012-12-14 10:02:38 AM  
3 votes:

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.


"Lifestyle expectations" like being able to eat, sleep indoors and see a doctor.
2012-12-14 09:58:55 AM  
3 votes:

Free Radical: career choice


You can't have a life if 40 hours a week doesn't pay you enough for food and shelter with some left over because you will die.

At $7 an hour, you're losing money each minute you spend at Walmart because pan handling pays better and it's not taxed.
2012-12-14 09:48:21 AM  
3 votes:
Stop shopping there.
2012-12-14 09:22:34 AM  
3 votes:

ox45tallboy: He said "competitive" wage, as in "it's about what everyone else in the industry pays". I don't think even $18.7 million would be enough for him to keep a straight face while calling it a "living wage".

When you ARE the industry, you are setting the standard, and everyone else competes against you. If they were to raise their wages, other retail stores would follow suit. But that extra $0.03 /share each quarter nets him another $2 million bonus*, so why bother? The people will work for crap.

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.)

*these numbers have been pulled out of my ass. Please feel free to substitute real numbers I don't feel like looking up right now and I guarantee that my point will still stand


Paying your workers well enough to afford your own products is a huge incentive.

Henry Ford figured that out a hundred years ago with the Model T.
2012-12-14 12:17:41 AM  
3 votes:
Maybe 10 bucks an hour is a living wage in Benton, Arkansas, but in the rest of the US, that's a wage for part-time high school students.
2012-12-14 11:09:31 AM  
2 votes:
I say make WalMart responsible for covering the cost of their employees food stamps etc with interest. Basically stop them from being able to use public funds from subsidizing their business.
2012-12-14 11:01:15 AM  
2 votes:

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.


The name of that city is New Delhi, India.
2012-12-14 10:43:17 AM  
2 votes:

Giltric: It all depends on how motivated or hungry someone is.....


You've never been hungry.
That's the only way you can speak with such ignorance.

Retail and fast food job schedules often don't allow second jobs. Even then, the wages won't pay for an education, or even leave time to attend classes/training.
"Comfortable" should be a one-bedroom apartment, enough for food and utilities, and enough extra to pay for bettering yourself. It is the very least someone working a full time job deserves, and easily doable in the richest country in the world.

There are two options.
1) Wages
2) Taxes

Unless you'll allow the poor to die in the street, they must either be given wages to survive by employers, or social services paid for via taxes. For everyone like yourself who asks "Why should Wal-Mart pay more?" ask yourself why you're paying for Wal-Mart's employees' healthcare.
2012-12-14 10:39:55 AM  
2 votes:

Fizpez: I detest WalMart in almost every single way but how much should a zero skill position pay? If you ignore health care I could probably "live" on about $8/hr. That means keeping myself alive, getting to work and going home. And that's about it.

Somewhere between that and "Walmart needs to pay their cashiers enough to support a family of 4 in a middle class lifestyle" is the problem.


No that is not the problem, nobody is claiming Walmart should be required to pay an income that can support a family of four in a middle class life style. People would like to see Walmart pay their employees a wage that does not require them to depend on government assistance for basic needs.
2012-12-14 10:29:27 AM  
2 votes:

o5iiawah: An individual can eat, sleep, pay utilities and participate in the employee benefits plan.go on welfare on the taxpayer's dime.


FTFY

o5iiawah: If said individual chooses to take on more life responsibilities, they incur a personal burden to acquire market skills to pay for them.


It's a Catch 22. Wal-Mart doesn't pay you enough to live comfortably by itself, let alone having extra to acquire new skills and education.
2012-12-14 10:19:01 AM  
2 votes:
If it weren't true, he wouldn't have to get on TV and deny it.
2012-12-14 04:12:50 AM  
2 votes:
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.
2012-12-14 02:09:42 AM  
2 votes:

ox45tallboy: Please feel free to substitute real numbers I don't feel like looking up right now


Okay, fine, I'll look up the real numbers.

Michael Duke's compensation package details:

Compensation for 2011
Salary $1,232,670
Restricted stock awards $12,652,363
All other compensation $476,567
Non-equity incentive plan compensation $3,852,059
Change in pension value and nonqualified deferred compensation earnings $499,062
Total Compensation $18,712,721

Wal-Mart (WMT) Earnings per share:

FY 2011: $4.47
FY 2010: $3.71

Why is that important?

Mike Duke, 61, received a base salary of about $1.2 million and a performance-based bonus of nearly $3.9 million for the [2010] fiscal year that ended Jan. 31.

In other words, $0.76 / share didn't increase his bonus. He could have paid people more, increasing earnings per share by a lesser amount, and still (theoretically) received the same bonus as the previous year.
2012-12-14 12:08:02 AM  
2 votes:
As a former WalMart worker, may I say: You are 1000% full of shiat, Mr. Duke, and you know it. Piss off.
2012-12-13 11:54:36 PM  
2 votes:
I say, I give all of my loyal courtiers a hogshead of mead, six boar shanks, and a bushel each of gruit and barley every fortnight to distribute to the peasantry that they might share in a taste of the crown's good fortune.
2012-12-13 11:40:03 PM  
2 votes:
Might be true if you work in management or on the corporate side.

/unfortunately that's not the vast majority of their employees
2012-12-14 01:58:42 PM  
1 votes:

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 01:35:51 PM  
1 votes:

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 12:55:08 PM  
1 votes:

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 11:48:06 AM  
1 votes:

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 11:38:41 AM  
1 votes:

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 11:32:07 AM  
1 votes:

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 11:22:53 AM  
1 votes:

MugzyBrown: WhyteRaven74: Which is great unless you happen to have kids

Sounds like a poor life decision to have kids if you're making $6 per hour


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 may personally be pro-bortion, but these facts are very real
2012-12-14 11:20:25 AM  
1 votes:
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.
2012-12-14 11:16:34 AM  
1 votes:
MugzyBrown, is it that you love corporations so much, or that you love humanity so little?
2012-12-14 11:13:23 AM  
1 votes:

MugzyBrown: WhyteRaven74: Which is great unless you happen to have kids

Sounds like a poor life decision to have kids if you're making $6 per hour


People never have their circumstances change after having children. Life is a continual path upwards.
2012-12-14 11:10:24 AM  
1 votes:

MugzyBrown: Splitting rent and utilities and basic food 4 ways makes it pretty damn cheap.


Which is great unless you happen to have kids or any of a number of other issues.
2012-12-14 11:06:52 AM  
1 votes:

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.


Like getting sick.

Like having to help a sick family member.

Like being the victim of a crime.

Etc.
2012-12-14 11:06:17 AM  
1 votes:
If you don't feel you get paid enough to push buttons of move boxes around....GET A BETTER JOB OR MAYBE A SKILL
2012-12-14 11:05:28 AM  
1 votes:
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.


If you have a second job and sell drugs on the side.

A cheap one bedroom is $500-600/month here in fly over country
2012-12-14 11:05:09 AM  
1 votes:

DirkValentine: A question that i like to ask (well, used to ask. I've since given up FB conversations with these people i'm going to refer to) is simply : "Do you think that someone that works 35+ hours a week deserves basic healthcare?"

The responses, quite literally, made me sad enough to just about cry. Or throw the computer out the window. Or stop talking to them.


I finished a contract with a nonprofit research effort in NoVA back in February. They have a 7-hour workday (35-hour work week), and their employer still finds it in his heart to provide these subhuman scum with health benefits, a 401(k) (with matching), and a host of other employee perks.

The guy who founded the concern is a (multi)billionaire - I think he knows how to run a profitable business. If giving people benefits was as dumb an expenditure as some people think, savvy businessmen wouldn't offer them, especially when they have no requirement to. It's simply a question of "How much do you want your employees to like where they work/the work they do?"
2012-12-14 10:59:06 AM  
1 votes:

kregh99: I am all for being paid a living wage, but not for doing a job that requires almost zero in the way of skills. Those jobs should pay shiat wages. shiat wages fuels the desire to not work shiat jobs.

Stay in school, kids. Stay in school.


Stay in school, incur massive amounts of debt.... and maybe.... just maybe you'll get a decent job, but probably not! Ahhhh capitalism it's so refreshingly retarded.
2012-12-14 10:57:02 AM  
1 votes:
I am all for being paid a living wage, but not for doing a job that requires almost zero in the way of skills. Those jobs should pay shiat wages. shiat wages fuels the desire to not work shiat jobs.

Stay in school, kids. Stay in school.
2012-12-14 10:53:31 AM  
1 votes:

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?


I have been thinking how you can fix the "35" hour part time trick.

Only thing I can come up with is defining anyone who works more than 20hours a week as full time.
2012-12-14 10:47:03 AM  
1 votes:

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.


You hire enough cart wranglers to wrangle the carts. Salary has nothing to do with it.

What would you do with extra cart wranglers?
2012-12-14 10:39:44 AM  
1 votes:

o5iiawah: An individual can eat, sleep, pay utilities and participate in the employee benefits plan.


Sleep is free everywhere. The Man might hassle you about sleeping in the park, but that's because he's a fascist pig.

I've also known people to be trash-pickers when it comes to eating. You'd be surprised what people have to do to stay alive. That can be "free" if you lower your standards enough.

If you wear lots of coats (you can get 'em from Goodwill if you don't keep hitting the same one week after week), there's no need to pay heating bills; board games and decks of cards (also from goodwill) don't require electricity and provide endless hours of entertainment. Utilities are clearly a luxury.

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?

There's a stripe of belief that stamps its feet at the "lazy, shiftless" welfare leeches, then derides their choice of job as "menial", or "known to be low-end" and supports the low wages, works to cut public assistance and further derides the choices they make in trying to make a better life (like, by having a cell phone, or not living in crime-infested areas). Those are the worst kind of people - the kind that are one short burst of logical thinking away from realizing how horrible a world they wish on everyone who wasn't handed the invisible opportunities inherent in NOT living hand-to-mouth through adulthood.

So to sum up - you can probably live a frugal lifestyle on $2/day, but is that what we want to subject people who WANT TO WORK FOR A LIVING to?
2012-12-14 10:39:13 AM  
1 votes:

o5iiawah: theurge14: 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.

And by fair market you mean a revolving door of minimum wage automatons who have no other choice in their town because Walmart ran off all the other stores and they need (not want) to buy from the same store because their lifestyle expectations of paying rent and eating ramen noodles require it. In short, elimination of a middle class.

Wal-Mart didn't run the jobs out. People willingly shopped there versus smaller stores. Dont like it? Take it up with your county executive who approved the permit.


Yes Walmart did run the jobs and businesses out, they've been doing it in towns across the country for years. They achieve this by dumping cheaply manufactured goods imported from a workforce-abusing China. Local businesses do not have legions of Chinese peasants at their disposal and therefore raise prices to make up the difference or close up shop. Chinese peasants are willingly abused because they have no other choice but to compete for a terrible job. American peasants are willingly abused because they have no other choice but to buy their Faded Glory blue jeans and Great Value milk there. There are actually towns and counties who refuse to let Walmart in to exploit their communities.

As far as the minimum wage job goes, thank the minimum wage. Wal-Mart might be willing to pay employees on a skill scale but those who do have skills are making the same wage as those who dont thanks to the price floor of labor.

Wow. That's a laugh. Walmart may also be willing to employ schoolchildren if it weren't for those pesky child labor laws.
2012-12-14 10:37:12 AM  
1 votes:
I detest WalMart in almost every single way but how much should a zero skill position pay? If you ignore health care I could probably "live" on about $8/hr. That means keeping myself alive, getting to work and going home. And that's about it.

Somewhere between that and "Walmart needs to pay their cashiers enough to support a family of 4 in a middle class lifestyle" is the problem.
2012-12-14 10:35:26 AM  
1 votes:

o5iiawah: As far as the minimum wage job goes, thank the minimum wage. Wal-Mart might be willing to pay employees on a skill scale but those who do have skills are making the same wage as those who dont thanks to the price floor of labor. The guy who unloads trucks or prepares returns for processing has more market skills than the guy who stands at the front door and says, "Welcome to Wal-Mart, I love you" yet both are paid the same because heaven forbid one be paid $5/hr and the other $10. You'll both be paid $7.50 and like it.


This in no way resembles reality in theory or practice. You have made the world a worse place by thinking it and typing it.
Removing minimum wage will not introduce a skill scale that wasn't already there. It will just let the scale start at 0.
2012-12-14 10:35:12 AM  
1 votes:
Why can't he just be honest and say it isn't Wal-Mart's job to pay a "living wage."
2012-12-14 10:33:50 AM  
1 votes:

theurge14: So you've never heard of Whole Foods?


Your example proves my point. How many U.S. employees does Whole Foods have compared to Walmart? And the 2 don't exactly compete for the same market.
2012-12-14 10:31:11 AM  
1 votes:

theurge14: 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.

And by fair market you mean a revolving door of minimum wage automatons who have no other choice in their town because Walmart ran off all the other stores and they need (not want) to buy from the same store because their lifestyle expectations of paying rent and eating ramen noodles require it. In short, elimination of a middle class.


Wal-Mart didn't run the jobs out. People willingly shopped there versus smaller stores. Dont like it? Take it up with your county executive who approved the permit.

As far as the minimum wage job goes, thank the minimum wage. Wal-Mart might be willing to pay employees on a skill scale but those who do have skills are making the same wage as those who dont thanks to the price floor of labor. The guy who unloads trucks or prepares returns for processing has more market skills than the guy who stands at the front door and says, "Welcome to Wal-Mart, I love you" yet both are paid the same because heaven forbid one be paid $5/hr and the other $10. You'll both be paid $7.50 and like it.
2012-12-14 10:28:29 AM  
1 votes:

o5iiawah: An individual can eat, sleep, pay utilities and participate in the employee benefits plan.


By "employee benefits plan" you mean "Food stamps" right?
2012-12-14 10:25:16 AM  
1 votes:

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?


It'd be nice if they paid them enough that they didn't qualify for gov't assistance.
2012-12-14 10:20:54 AM  
1 votes:
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?
2012-12-14 09:59:21 AM  
1 votes:
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.
2012-12-14 09:55:17 AM  
1 votes:
I give it about 10 more years before they start paying in WalMart Buxx so their employees will have the privilege of shopping exclusively at the company store.
2012-12-14 09:53:20 AM  
1 votes:
Working at Walmart is a career choice?

Really?
2012-12-14 09:51:46 AM  
1 votes:
So there are no Walmart employees on government assistance?
2012-12-14 08:49:21 AM  
1 votes:

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


And they probably keep it in their refrigerator!
 
Displayed 59 of 59 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report