Thank you, Walmart

[theBruiser500]

"It's the same people who hate WalMart. You know, because it's Walmart's fault they are hiring low-wage, low-skilled workers with few opportunities for any other kind of work and are paying them accordingly. Yeah, it's WalMart's fault.

You can't get through to someone who ignores facts and denies reality. "

natedogg your post is a joke. How can anyone argue with what you say here, 'it's wal-mart's fault for hiring low wage work'. That is a tricky pathetic way to state your case. It's stupid to argue against that, that's the nature of our capatalist society, your point means nothing. What is bad is that someone can work full time and still be below the poverty line.

"In the Dec. 16 New York Review of Books, Simon Head, director of the Project on Technology and the Workplace at the Century Foundation, stated, "the average pay of a sales clerk [italics mine] at Wal-Mart was $8.50 an hour, or about $14,000 a year, $1,000 below the government's definition of the poverty level for a family of three."

The rest of that post

I guess you shouldn't start a family if you only make 14k/year.

[The Don]

[ QUOTE ]
"It's the same people who hate WalMart. You know, because it's Walmart's fault they are hiring low-wage, low-skilled workers with few opportunities for any other kind of work and are paying them accordingly. Yeah, it's WalMart's fault.

You can't get through to someone who ignores facts and denies reality. "

natedogg your post is a joke. How can anyone argue with what you say here, 'it's wal-mart's fault for hiring low wage work'. That is a tricky pathetic way to state your case. It's stupid to argue against that, that's the nature of our capatalist society, your point means nothing. What is bad is that someone can work full time and still be below the poverty line.

"In the Dec. 16 New York Review of Books, Simon Head, director of the Project on Technology and the Workplace at the Century Foundation, stated, "the average pay of a sales clerk [italics mine] at Wal-Mart was $8.50 an hour, or about $14,000 a year, $1,000 below the government's definition of the poverty level for a family of three."

The rest of that post

[/ QUOTE ]

These people's skills are valued by Wal-Mart at a rate of $8.50 an hour. Do you believe that they should be paid more just because they fall below the arbitrary "poverty line" (how can some bureaucrat in Washington really define this?). Nobody is putting a gun to their head and forcing them to work at Wal-Mart. Maybe they can find one of these magical corporations where they will be paid above their market value at the expense of the profitability of the business (would there be any point in starting a business and providing goods/services if this were the case?). Actually, this is possible in a multitude of government jobs.

That's actually a good idea.

1. Work 2 weeks at Wal-Mart
2. Buy a suit
3. Move to D.C. and help somebody waste their budget

[BadBoyBenny]

They also run the risk of being accused of price gouging if they raise prices there now.

[natedogg]

[ QUOTE ]
"It's the same people who hate WalMart. You know, because it's Walmart's fault they are hiring low-wage, low-skilled workers with few opportunities for any other kind of work and are paying them accordingly. Yeah, it's WalMart's fault.

You can't get through to someone who ignores facts and denies reality. "

natedogg your post is a joke. How can anyone argue with what you say here, 'it's wal-mart's fault for hiring low wage work'. That is a tricky pathetic way to state your case. It's stupid to argue against that, that's the nature of our capatalist society, your point means nothing. What is bad is that someone can work full time and still be below the poverty line.

"In the Dec. 16 New York Review of Books, Simon Head, director of the Project on Technology and the Workplace at the Century Foundation, stated, "the average pay of a sales clerk [italics mine] at Wal-Mart was $8.50 an hour, or about $14,000 a year, $1,000 below the government's definition of the poverty level for a family of three."

The rest of that post

[/ QUOTE ]

Well I don't understand WalMart is doing wrong by paying people a low wage (albeit lower than minimum wage). Maybe you can explain why that makes them evil?

natedogg

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
You can't use reason with these people. These are the same ones who support minimum wage in the face of all evidence to the contrary, not to mention price controls in general. It's religion for them.

[/ QUOTE ] 1. Minimum wage: What evidence would that be ? Do we get to trot out again the relevant studies?
2. Price controls: I'm not in favor of controlling prices, in principle. There are areas in the economy where competition exists and in those areas price should be allowed to move freely -- with an anti-trust watchdog in place. (I know, I'm a hopeless romantic!) And there are areas where hidden or explicit monopolies/oligopolies operate; in such areas, the answer is not so straightforward. Not to me, at least.

(For instance, I have been into a lot of IPOs in European and non-European countries where the issue was an ex-utility that henceforth would both be a private company and a state-santioned monopoly!)

[ QUOTE ]
These are the same folks who with a straight face will state sheer nonsense such as that Bush's tax cut is bad for the middle class.

[/ QUOTE ] Don't be absurd.

Every individual that gets a tax break, has an immediate benefit. The question is whether or not this is good also for "the whole of individuals", i.e. the economic status of the society. (For example, faced with a significant & growing budget deficit, the government decides to proceed with a huge tax cut. Clever or stupid? Ronald Reagan's administration admitted it was stupid.)


[ QUOTE ]
It's the same people who hate WalMart ... because it's Walmart's fault they are hiring low-wage, low-skilled workers with few opportunities for any other kind of work and are paying them accordingly.

[/ QUOTE ] The antipatrhy towards Wal-Mart is certainly not because they are a job provider!

It's because Wal-Mart uses the worst possible capitalist practices to destroy neighborhoods, chase away long-time inhabitants from their homes, drive small suppliers to the wall, treat low-level employees like trash, strong-arm unions away, and so forth.

[ QUOTE ]
They are convinced the oil companies are immune to competition.

[/ QUOTE ] If you knew how laughable this statement is, you would not laugh.

[ QUOTE ]
These are the same folks who think that nationlizing certain industries is a good idea. Public Power! Yeah!

[/ QUOTE ] OK you are ranting now. Must be that period of the week. Bye.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't really understand what you're trying to argue here. Companies are fighting for labor in a tight market. They are raising their asking price for such labor.

[/ QUOTE ]



Except they aren't. They have a disproportionate amount of leverage in the supply and demand scenario. To all intents and purposes they control the market. The argument that they can employ on such a low wage because an adequate supply of people exists who will work for such does not explain why, when those people disappear, they are unwilling, even at least temporarily, to up their hourly rate by any significance even though by not doing so they lose money due to the reduction in store opening hours or their inability to service their customers.

[/ QUOTE ]

But (as I recall from somewhere earlier in this thread) they DID up their wage, and offered a $250 sign-up bonus, no? Surely you are not arguing that they have unlimited capacity to raise wages?

Pretty disgusting poll about Wall-Mart. Apparently 56% of Americans think that Wall-Mart is bad for our country.

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticl....xml&rpc=22

In a related poll, 56% of Americans don't have ANY knowledge of basic economics and are closet socialists.

[jcx]

[ QUOTE ]
Pretty disgusting poll about Wall-Mart. Apparently 56% of Americans think that Wall-Mart is bad for our country.

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticl....xml&rpc=22

In a related poll, 56% of Americans don't have ANY knowledge of basic economics and are closet socialists.

[/ QUOTE ]

Look who commissioned the poll and the only surprise is only 56% of Americans don't like Wal-Mart.

"The national poll -- commissioned by WakeUpWalMart.com, a union-funded group that has been pressuring Wal-Mart to raise employee wages and benefits"