- Joined
- May 22, 2012
- Messages
- 104,408
- Reaction score
- 67,624
- Location
- Uhland, Texas
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
The bill, clearly targeting the big box stores such as Walmart and Target, classified large retailers as those with stores of at least 75,000 square feet and whose parent companies have sales of more than $1 billion annually.
This moronic bill was intended to make Walmart and Target stores inside DC pay at least $12.50/hour while all others could still pay as little as $8.25/hour.
Read more: DC Mayor Vetoes Higher Wage Bill | Fox Business
If Target does the same thing walmart does in regard to hiring on part timers and temp workers instead of full time employees then these jobs would not have been missed.
Fine. Ask Mayor Vincent Gray why Walmart holds meetings with it's employees and shows them how gainfully employed people can sign up for food stamps. :roll:Gray released a four-page letter Thursday explaining his reasons for vetoing the bill. Rather than expanding job opportunities for D.C. residents, Gray said the bill, if approved, would “result in significant harm to the residents and areas of the District most in need of jobs, economic development, and new amenities.”
Fine. Ask Mayor Vincent Gray why Walmart holds meetings with it's employees and shows them how gainfully employed people can sign up for food stamps. :roll:
I believe you but it still happens. Take NoteInteresting, this never happened to me when I was an employee of Walmart.
Good move. Glad to hear it. I thought it was absurd out of the gate.
I believe you but it still happens. Take Note
I did a quick search through there and scanned several statements about Wal-Mart but no where did I see that article saying that Wal-Mart holds meetings showing its employees how to get on foodstamps while employed. 51 Wal-Mart mentions through out that whole article. What it did state was that Wal-Mart has the most employee's recieving welfare benefits though. But that is not the same as them holding meetings to tell their employees how to get foodstamps while employed.
Wal-Mart has lots of problems with it, but saying something is happening when there is no evidence of it does not need to be added as it just weakens your arguements and credibility.
Try this link.I did a quick search through there and scanned several statements about Wal-Mart but no where did I see that article saying that Wal-Mart holds meetings showing its employees how to get on foodstamps while employed. 51 Wal-Mart mentions through out that whole article. What it did state was that Wal-Mart has the most employee's recieving welfare benefits though. But that is not the same as them holding meetings to tell their employees how to get foodstamps while employed.
Wal-Mart has lots of problems with it, but saying something is happening when there is no evidence of it does not need to be added as it just weakens your arguements and credibility.
Larry Bourne, a member of Our Walmart and a worker at the Crestwood, Il. Walmart, is on strike now while his wife, who also works at that store, is in Bentonville, Ark. protesting at the shareholders' meeting.
As he picketed outside the Chicago Walmart this morning, he slammed what he called Walmart's "predatory policies."
"They even terminate you just for taking a sick day to which you are supposed to be entitled," he said. "And the human resources people are really slick. They know that you can't live on what they pay you so they bring you in and show you how to game the social welfare system. They get you on food stamps or any other form of public assistance they can get you on. It's a disgrace that with a full time job you should have to go on food stamps."
Fine. Ask Mayor Vincent Gray why Walmart holds meetings with it's employees and shows them how gainfully employed people can sign up for food stamps. :roll:
Try this link.
The difference Sir is that the private sector is supposed to get rid of this kind of madness; the private sector gets millions of dollars in tax breaks and here we have gainfully employed people that has to use a welfare system. These businesses preach less state all the time when it has to be apparent to most that they love it - especially while receiving millions of dollars in tax breaks.Because Walmart likes to see its employees get their "fair share" of the wages of others. You make it sound like Walmart invented these moronic gov't income redistribution programs. Sure Walmart takes advantage of them, but so do many other businesses that use low skilled labor. If your employees require $X in order to comfortably survive then what difference does it make what portion of $X is derived from their paycheck and how much is added by social "safety net" programs?
That's fine with me. I feel the same way when Walmart comes out with a statement without any substance behind it too.No offense but I'm not going to take the word of a disgruntled employee over my own experiance.
The difference Sir is that the private sector is supposed to get rid of this kind of madness; the private sector gets millions of dollars in tax breaks and here we have gainfully employed people that has to use a welfare system. These businesses preach less state all the time when it has to be apparent to most that they love it - especially while receiving millions of dollars in tax breaks.
Did they invent them? No, but they love them.
So what you are telling me is that the private sector actually needs the State to make a strong economy, right?Sure they love them, that is my point. You see this as corporate welfare, which is exactly what it is. Absent these "safety net" programs those folks would not be able to work AND get "welfare". It is only because "welfare" pays more than the minimum wage (usually based on household size) that folks can, and will, do both.
Study: welfare pays more than work in most states | The Daily Caller
So what you are telling me is that the private sector actually needs the State to make a strong economy, right?
OK. Then I'm right. The private sector makes sure that the nannny state is always there to insure that they have a workforce that people like me have to pay for so that Walmart can keep all it's money and not pay an exorbitant amount of taxes on.No. What I am telling you is that employers will pay no more than they have to in order to attract qualified applicants and retain qualified workers. If the pay offered was not sufficient to live on then nobody would apply for the job or stay working there. But since the gov't assures folks, that no matter what they make working, so long as they have a job, that simply having a certain size of a household entitles them to social "safety net" program benefits. That "safety net" alone makes that low wage offered for the job OK instead of forcing the employer to offer more in order to attract/retain qualified workers.
OK. Then I'm right. The private sector makes sure that the nannny state is always there to insure that they have a workforce that people like me have to pay for so that Walmart can keep all it's money and not pay an exorbitant amount of taxes on.
Man, that's ingenious!
That's not the way actual "Free Enterprise" is supposed to work. As a matter of fact I see it as a rich man's welfare system.I suppose you could look at it that way. But what you save by the use of low wage labor (lower prices for goods and services) you (or someone) must pay for in taxation to make up the difference via income redistribution programs. The problem is that is not what is really happening - federal taxation is lower than federal spending. We are instead borrowing money to subsidize the low wage workers, so that we can have our cake and eat it too.
Walmart, as well as all other employers payng those low wages, are happy because the sheeple let the gov't borrow money in their names to keep labor costs artificially low for them. The republicants won't let taxes go up and the demorats won't let "safety net" spending go down, thus the Walmarts are making lots of money and the national debt simply keeps on rising. The net effect is that we are borrowing money to give to the Walmarts and our congress critters laugh as we re-elect them over and over.
That's not the way actual "Free Enterprise" is supposed to work. As a matter of fact I see it as a rich man's welfare system.
I did a quick search through there and scanned several statements about Wal-Mart but no where did I see that article saying that Wal-Mart holds meetings showing its employees how to get on foodstamps while employed. 51 Wal-Mart mentions through out that whole article. What it did state was that Wal-Mart has the most employee's recieving welfare benefits though. But that is not the same as them holding meetings to tell their employees how to get foodstamps while employed.
Wal-Mart has lots of problems with it, but saying something is happening when there is no evidence of it does not need to be added as it just weakens your arguements and credibility.
That's not the way actual "Free Enterprise" is supposed to work. As a matter of fact I see it as a rich man's welfare system.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?