Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?[W:1258]

[imagep]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

If. Where do you supposed they get these other skills from the skill fairie?

School? Books? Youtube videos? Information is easy to find, for those who bother to seek.

Seriously, do you know what the difference in skill level is between a $16/hr factory production line worker and a $9/hr Walmart worker is? Nothing. The factory worker just bothered to apply.

 

[Slyhunter]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

I had virtually no resources when I started my business, 25 years ago. I rented the cheapest space I could (my front door was in an alley and the building was infested with termites), borrowed a very small amount of money from a consumer finance company to purchase minimal equipment, took out a small ad in the local newspaper, and went out posting fliers and handing out business cards. Virtually every penny that I made over my bare living expenses was plowed back into the company, and after a few years I discovered that I actually had been in business long enough, and just successful enough, that I could borrow money from banks to expand my business with.

Anyone who is credit worthy, and has a proven business plan can obtain the capital needed to start a business. It maybe a bootstrap business like mine, but anyone can do it.

Are you sure that you are a right leaning libertarian? You often sound like an excuse making liberal.

philosophical I'm Libertarian. I believe everyone should be free to do whatever they want as long as it does not interfere with another individual doing the same. However, I have a heart. I also believe that if you work for a living you should earn a living and that those who have the most should help those who have the least.

 

[Slyhunter]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

School? Books? Youtube videos? Information is easy to find, for those who bother to seek.

Seriously, do you know what the difference in skill level is between a $16/hr factory production line worker and a $9/hr Walmart worker is? Nothing. The factory worker just bothered to apply.

Not a lot of factory jobs around here.

 

[Mycroft]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

philosophical I'm Libertarian. I believe everyone should be free to do whatever they want as long as it does not interfere with another individual doing the same. However, I have a heart. I also believe that if you work for a living you should earn a living and that those who have the most should help those who have the least.

Yeah...those who have the most should...or is it WILL?...help those who have the least. Even if you have to get the government to FORCE them. Right?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

I tried my hand at plumbing once. That was a big mistake.
Can't cut a straight line either.
Not everyone is gifted like you.

Then not everyone should be paid like me. It is just that simple. The idea that pay should equal the worker's need, rather than he value of work accomplished is silly. If I need a skilled plumber then I must pay the going rate for a skilled plumber but, if I need a moron to say "do you want fries with that" then I should pay them accordingly.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

I'd be happy to be that someone, if I had the resources to do so.

That is wonderful, and I hope that one day you get those resources. But that is no reason to expect another to do what you can (or will) not do. We have many that have come to expect some gov't force can compel those with "resources" to take care of those that lack them. There is no valid reason to expect that any McJob will be able to support a household - if that were the case then why would anyone aspire to do more?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

We have millions of self employed folks, and many of those people provide employment for not only themselves, but also for others, so I wouldn't say "rarely". Slightly more than 50% of our jobs are with small businesses.

Maybe we should start teaching entrapanureship in school.

Perhaps you missed my point - not many self employed people (or small businesses) are willing to pay entry level, unskilled labor a sufficient wage to support a four person household. Walmart supplies many jobs, it just that many of them are entry level jobs which not going to pay extremely well.

 

[Mycroft]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

Perhaps you missed my point - not many self employed people (or small businesses) are willing to pay entry level, unskilled labor a sufficient wage to support a four person household. Walmart supplies many jobs, it just that many of them are entry level jobs which not going to pay extremely well.

Next thing you know, those bleeding-heart liberals are going to want the small business and the self-employed to pay their employees a "living wage", too.

Oh...wait...minimum wage...I forgot.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

Next thing you know, those bleeding-heart liberals are going to want the small business and the self-employed to pay their employees a "living wage", too.

Oh...wait...minimum wage...I forgot.

Yep. Who needs a union if the gov't will act like one?

 

[Slyhunter]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

Perhaps you missed my point - not many self employed people (or small businesses) are willing to pay entry level, unskilled labor a sufficient wage to support a four person household. Walmart supplies many jobs, it just that many of them are entry level jobs which not going to pay extremely well.

Why does it have to be one extreme or the other. All I want is for a person who works for a living to be able to earn a living for himself, not a 4 person family. Rent, utilities, gas, vehicle payment runs about 2k a month in Florida. If he wants more than that he needs to work harder/better/smarter for it.

 

[AJiveMan]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

How well can anyone feed their children when Wal-mart is paying them minimum wage of $7.50-$8.00 an hour?

Not very well, and they couldn't make it without food stamps.

That's only a small portion of it. This is an excellent read here in this link, of how a small town in Wisconsin defeated the walmart machine of questionable business tactics.

It shows how walmart employs tactics of trying to lowball communities into giving them what they (walmart) wants. Walmart does this almost everywhere they place their footprint. I have more links to back this up too.



Spooner, WI. Wal-Mart Finally Kills Project. Really.

It is said walmart employs a little over a million people. Their website claims full time associates earn $11.00 and more, but, walmart will not divulge how many part timers and how many full time associates they employ. At glassdoor dot com, most associates, like cashiers and stockers only get a little over 8 bucks an hour, these I'm thinking are the part timers, or what? 34 hours a week or less.

Walmart claims that 475,000 associates are full time, that means 525,000+ are working for around 8 bucks an hour, the reason taxpayers are subsidizing working Americans with EBT, and other public assistance programs.

 

[AJiveMan]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

I had virtually no resources when I started my business, 25 years ago. I rented the cheapest space I could (my front door was in an alley and the building was infested with termites), borrowed a very small amount of money from a consumer finance company to purchase minimal equipment, took out a small ad in the local newspaper, and went out posting fliers and handing out business cards. Virtually every penny that I made over my bare living expenses was plowed back into the company, and after a few years I discovered that I actually had been in business long enough, and just successful enough, that I could borrow money from banks to expand my business with.

Anyone who is credit worthy, and has a proven business plan can obtain the capital needed to start a business. It maybe a bootstrap business like mine, but anyone can do it.

Are you sure that you are a right leaning libertarian? You often sound like an excuse making liberal.

See now, you asked banks to lend you money to expand your biz. Totally different from walmart, they go into communities, wave a carrot in the rabbit's face, then take the carrot back and say, IF you do this, we'll build a store, meanwhile, behind the rabbit's back, they're planning on appealing property taxes and assessments, lowering what they'd normally owe for pride of ownership in the property they sprawl upon, thereby lowering the revenue a city, county will take in, and placing the burden upon other taxpayers backs.
See the link in my post # 1236. I have more to back up what I typed too.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

Why does it have to be one extreme or the other. All I want is for a person who works for a living to be able to earn a living for himself, not a 4 person family. Rent, utilities, gas, vehicle payment runs about 2k a month in Florida. If he wants more than that he needs to work harder/better/smarter for it.

I find it interesting that your desired MW (based on a 40 hour week?) level is $24K/year - which is slightly above the current federal poverty level for a 4 person household. When I worked for MW that required me to live with at least one roommate to share expenses and to drive an afforbable used vehicle. One must learn to make their living expenses match their income - not the other way around.

http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/14poverty.cfm

 

[TheNextEra]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

Well then you shouldn't have any trouble refuting them which you have never done. Name for me the economic results that Obama generated that are better than Bush's? Name for me the foreign policy successes Obama had that are better than Bush's. What you show is that you really are a low information voter and buy what you are told. Trust but verify and liberals trust but never verify.

Sorry but I don't claim Obama's results were better. You Cons always like to try and decide what other people's views are. Maybe you should follow the last bit of your advice and VERIFY before you make accusations.

And the foreign policy success that Obama has had was getting Osama, unlike Bush (your god) who didn't think it was a priority. I also think the policy of abolishing Don't ask Don't tell was a success so our men and women can serve openly without fear of people like you.

 

[Conservative]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

Sorry but I don't claim Obama's results were better. You Cons always like to try and decide what other people's views are. Maybe you should follow the last bit of your advice and VERIFY before you make accusations.

And the foreign policy success that Obama has had was getting Osama, unlike Bush (your god) who didn't think it was a priority. I also think the policy of abolishing Don't ask Don't tell was a success so our men and women can serve openly without fear of people like you.

LOL, Seems I do understand economics, civics, and leadership much, much better than you. Your views are quite clear to everyone who bothers to read them

Bush understood the big picture, Bin Laden wasn't al Qaeda but a leader of al Qaeda and "getting him" didn't end the war on terror as we are seeing all over the world. Bush tactics however are credited with "getting Bin Laden" but that reality escapes you.

Amazing how "Don't ask, Don't tell" which was never an issue prior to liberals making it one served our military and their principles quite well. Won wars with that policy and only a very small percentage of the population being gay gives a damn.

 

[blaxshep]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

Perhaps you missed my point - not many self employed people (or small businesses) are willing to pay entry level, unskilled labor a sufficient wage to support a four person household. Walmart supplies many jobs, it just that many of them are entry level jobs which not going to pay extremely well.

You do realize that what the employer does not pay the government takes from us, the tax payers, to subzide the lives of these people in the form of entitlements right? It makes more sense and would cost us all less to have the employer pay a living wage and we all pay more for goods and services, that is unless you seriously think the government can redistribute our wealth more efficently then the free market. Your "point" is well taken but invalid in the liberal entitlement world of today, like it or not its no longer about what a person is worth it is about who should pay for what is entitled the employer or the tax payers.

 

[Mycroft]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

You do realize that what the employer does not pay the government takes from us, the tax payers, to subzide the lives of these people in the form of entitlements right? It makes more sense and would cost us all less to have the employer pay a living wage and we all pay more for goods and services, that is unless you seriously think the government can redistribute our wealth more efficently then the free market. Your "point" is well taken but invalid in the liberal entitlement world of today, like it or not its no longer about what a person is worth it is about who should pay for what is entitled the employer or the tax payers.

LOL!!

In effect, what you are saying is the we, the people, should make a third party (the employer) pay for our entitlement attitude. Sounds to me like those who support that entitlement attitude are too chicken-**** to take responsibility for the costs involved with their attitude.

 

[TheNextEra]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

LOL, Seems I do understand economics, civics, and leadership much, much better than you. Your views are quite clear to everyone who bothers to read them

You lied and attributed actions to me without proof of them at all. Your lies are quite clear and have been chown time after time.

Bush understood the big picture, Bin Laden wasn't al Qaeda but a leader of al Qaeda and "getting him" didn't end the war on terror as we are seeing all over the world. Bush tactics however are credited with "getting Bin Laden" but that reality escapes you.

Amazing how "Don't ask, Don't tell" which was never an issue prior to liberals making it one served our military and their principles quite well. Won wars with that policy and only a very small percentage of the population being gay gives a damn.

You lied and attributed actions to me without proof of them at all. Your lies are quite clear and have been chown time after time.

For someone who claims to have run a multi-million dollar company you know very little but regurgitate much with little knowledge of what you are even saying.

Amazing how you Bush apologists don't understand Bin Ladin and the importance to getting him.

Also amazing is how when you are shown to be wrong and there were some successes to Obama especially with Don't Ask Don't Tell getting removed, you instead detract and run away. We know you hate homosexuals and never wanted them to be able to serve openly. Thank god social conservatism is on the ropes in the public sector and people like you are on the wrong side of history.

FYI I think Obama is a lousy president, but he has had successes just like BUsh had some. Both were bad, but apologists like you for Bush will never admit any that goes against your side. What a good little Republican you are and hardly a conservative.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

You do realize that what the employer does not pay the government takes from us, the tax payers, to subzide the lives of these people in the form of entitlements right? It makes more sense and would cost us all less to have the employer pay a living wage and we all pay more for goods and services, that is unless you seriously think the government can redistribute our wealth more efficently then the free market. Your "point" is well taken but invalid in the liberal entitlement world of today, like it or not its no longer about what a person is worth it is about who should pay for what is entitled the employer or the tax payers.

The bolded above is wrong for the following reason; the subsidies, offered via "safety net" programs, are only given to those few workers in needy households (approx 15% of the population) whereas the higher mandated wages would be paid to all workers. Payiing all workers more drives up prices of goods and services, hitting the lowest income folks the hardest, while taxpayer subsdies for a few workers leaves prices alone, hitting only the wealthier folks for a bit more in taxation.

 

[Conservative]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

You lied and attributed actions to me without proof of them at all. Your lies are quite clear and have been chown time after time.

For someone who claims to have run a multi-million dollar company you know very little but regurgitate much with little knowledge of what you are even saying.

Amazing how you Bush apologists don't understand Bin Ladin and the importance to getting him.

Also amazing is how when you are shown to be wrong and there were some successes to Obama especially with Don't Ask Don't Tell getting removed, you instead detract and run away. We know you hate homosexuals and never wanted them to be able to serve openly. Thank god social conservatism is on the ropes in the public sector and people like you are on the wrong side of history.

FYI I think Obama is a lousy president, but he has had successes just like BUsh had some. Both were bad, but apologists like you for Bush will never admit any that goes against your side. What a good little Republican you are and hardly a conservative.

Your posts say it all and I don't lie, I state opinions based upon what I see. My data is factual and thus verifiable.

For someone who claims to have run a multi million dollar company, my results speak for themselves.

Amazing how getting Bin Laden with Bush era tactics is ignored just like the fact that terrorism still exists after getting him.

Tell me, how long was don't ask don't tell in the military?

Obama is the worst President that we have had since Carter and the results prove it. You ignore the results but do say he was a lousy President, that is a plus for you.

The rest of your post is typical diversion and nothing more than an uneducated opinion.

 

[blaxshep]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

The bolded above is wrong for the following reason; the subsidies, offered via "safety net" programs, are only given to those few workers in needy households (approx 15% of the population) whereas the higher mandated wages would be paid to all workers. Payiing all workers more drives up prices of goods and services, hitting the lowest income folks the hardest, while taxpayer subsdies for a few workers leaves prices alone, hitting only the wealthier folks for a bit more in taxation.

Higher mandated wages would only effect those not making a living wage, the SAME people that live off entitlements now not ALL workers.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

Higher mandated wages would only effect those not making a living wage, the SAME people that live off entitlements now not ALL workers.

Wrong. Each person now making MW + X/hour is likely to continue to do so after the MW is raised. This higher MW mandate is not targeted like the "safety net" is, so each entry level worker whether a moderately rich kid working a part time job, a person working a second job (in the household) or a head of household would get that higher pay. All, including those on SS or other fixed income pensions would get to "enjoy" the higher prices just to keep a few less folks on the "safety net". Have you even considered the added cost in COLA for SS and gov't pensions that would result?

 

[blaxshep]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

Wrong. Each person now making MW + X/hour is likely to continue to do so after the MW is raised. This higher MW mandate is not targeted like the "safety net" is, so each entry level worker whether a moderately rich kid working a part time job, a person working a second job (in the household) or a head of household would get that higher pay. All, including those on SS or other fixed income pensions would get to "enjoy" the higher prices just to keep a few less folks on the "safety net". Have you even considered the added cost in COLA for SS and gov't pensions that would result?

The object should be to eliminate welfare and make employers pay a living wage so the tax payers do not have to subsidize the labor force and a MW mandate could be targeted in a bill. In fact knowing our legislators it would most likely be 27,000 pages that we have to pass so we can find out what is in it. I support the concept I am putting forth but yes you are right I am sure the government would make a total farce out of implimenting it. No I have not considered government pensions, but that is another thing we need to stop doing in the first place.

 

[blaxshep]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

LOL!!

In effect, what you are saying is the we, the people, should make a third party (the employer) pay for our entitlement attitude. Sounds to me like those who support that entitlement attitude are too chicken-**** to take responsibility for the costs involved with their attitude.

Sounds like we need a seperate tax system for liberals and conservatives

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: Why should we subsidize Wal-Marts crappy wages?

The object should be to eliminate welfare and make employers pay a living wage so the tax payers do not have to subsidize the labor force and a MW mandate could be targeted in a bill. In fact knowing our legislators it would most likely be 27,000 pages that we have to pass so we can find out what is in it. I support the concept I am putting forth but yes you are right I am sure the government would make a total farce out of implimenting it. No I have not considered government pensions, but that is another thing we need to stop doing in the first place.

Are you kidding me? Who would hire a person that had to be paid more than another to do the same job? We can't have wages based on household size and other household income like the "safety net" does or nobody would hire those poor folks at all.