Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's not what I'm saying. I just want to see what happens. I'm looking at it more as an experiment and I'm curious of the outcome...
OK Sorry. This is giving me a heart attack and no one has mentioned the a* word. Congress might step in if the mayor doesn't veto. I wouldn't support a 50% jump in the minimum wage for anyone in one swoop but if you're going to do it then do it for everyone. Let prices rise all through the city.
There is no working class in the city, lol. You're not familiar with DC are you?
You must be one of those people who assume the people of DC don't work. I am sure you are down in the streets of DC really getting to know the people that live there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by happytrails6
Then, watch your prices go up at Walmart! Up until now, I have saved thousands of dollars buying from them. I love Walmart.
Well, you save thousands because they are screwing over their own employees and paying them the least they can possibly pay them so that you can save a buck....and people wonder what is wrong with this country.
Walmart gets an unfair shake IMO. They provide very low cost items for poor people including fresh fruits and veggies and lean protein that many poor people can't get. Walmart allows poor people's dollars to go further.
In Portland, Fred Meyer's prices are better, the quality of food is better, and they pay their employees better. Just so you know.
You must be one of those people who assume the people of DC don't work. I am sure you are down in the streets of DC really getting to know the people that live there.
Well, you save thousands because they are screwing over their own employees and paying them the least they can possibly pay them so that you can save a buck....and people wonder what is wrong with this country.
Those people would be making the same no matter where they worked. You don't even need a HS diploma to work there.
Those people would be making the same no matter where they worked. You don't even need a HS diploma to work there.
And they should be making a living wage, if you work full time, that should be enough money to keep you off government assistance. Instead, places like Walmart would rather pay their employees less and let the government pick up the slack for them. If Walmart and places like them wish to do business, they should be able to provide an income high enough for their employees to keep them out of poverty.
Then, watch your prices go up at Walmart! Up until now, I have saved thousands of dollars buying from them. I love Walmart.
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78
Well, you save thousands because they are screwing over their own employees and paying them the least they can possibly pay them so that you can save a buck....
...and so those same employees can save a buck or two (thanks to employee discounts).
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78
and people wonder what is wrong with this country.
"Screwing over". "Wrong". Where do you people get the idea that these are anything more than subjective terms from your own personal points of view? How do you know that for every one Wal-Mart employee who is unhappy with their job and/or salary, there aren't two Wal-Mart employees that are content with both? I'm willing to bet that you don't know that, yet you act like you do.
And they should be making a living wage, if you work full time, that should be enough money to keep you off government assistance. Instead, places like Walmart would rather pay their employees less and let the government pick up the slack for them. If Walmart and places like them wish to do business, they should be able to provide an income high enough for their employees to keep them out of poverty.
This has no basis in logic.
Wal-Mart is not solely responsible for the well being of their employees. Wal-Mart is not adopting anyone. This is quite simply illogical and hyperbolic BS.
All you're doing is shifting welfare costs around, assigning them to the employer (well, actually, other customers of Wal-Mart) instead of the taxpayer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by theunbrainwashed
So let me get this straight, you hate welfare, but you're ok with Walmart getting welfare from the government? You can bet that 99.9%-100% of the potential Walmart workers in DC would still be on public assistance just like the many many many Walmart workers across the country. Corporate welfare at its finest
That's not corporate welfare by any meaningful definition. This is a complete perversion of the term.
Unless of course you wish to take the standpoint that Wal-Mart is a parental figure, solely responsible for the financial well being of all of its employees. Which you will not do, because that's crap.
This entire line of logic is ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous. It's repeated over and over again, but in reality it is nothing more than fancy wordsmithing, trying to make something sound like something it is not. It is really a complete lie.
Wal-Mart is not solely responsible for the well being of their employees. Wal-Mart is not adopting anyone. This is quite simply illogical and hyperbolic BS.
All you're doing is shifting welfare costs around, assigning them to the employer (well, actually, other customers of Wal-Mart) instead of the taxpayer.
So you are fine with Walmart not paying their full time employees enough of a living wage so that they are forced to live off government assistance?
There is no shifting of welfare costs here, if the people of Walmart are working employees, then they should be given at the minimum a living wage, or what's the point in working?
Or do you not want the poor working class off government welfare because you would have no one to blame about being on government welfare?
...and so those same employees can save a buck or two (thanks to employee discounts).
"Screwing over". "Wrong". Where do you people get the idea that these are anything more than subjective terms from your own personal points of view? How do you know that for every one Wal-Mart employee who is unhappy with their job and/or salary, there aren't two Wal-Mart employees that are content with both? I'm willing to bet that you don't know that, yet you act like you do.
You are right, those are subjective words, and I am sure some people do enjoy working for Walmart, but their turn-over rate with employees might suggest otherwise.
What a joke. How can any intelligent person take this type of spin seriously?
Following this logic, I am costing taxpayers $20,000 per year by not spending $20,000 more on goods and services (labor) than the market will bear.
Moonbattery at its finest. And it gets eaten up. Mind boggling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by theunbrainwashed
Yes it does. Don't play word semantics with me. When a company relies on so many low paid workers to make its obscene profits on the backs of the middle class, that is corporate welfare. Walmart does not pay out benefits to its part time employees, which are the majority of employees. Ergo, those employees are then eligible for SNAP and Medicaid, benefits that Walmart would have otherwise paid out of their own pockets but refuse to do so
No it's not.
Nobody is being given anything. Wal-Mart is not being subsidized. Wal-Mart is hiring people who do not have the skills to demand a higher wage, and paying what the market will bear.
The outside circumstances of said peoples' lives who may or may not require them to take welfare are completely and totally irrelevant. This is not Wal-Mart's problem. Period. Hiring someone does not make you responsible for that person's well being. It makes you responsible for what is agreed upon in your hiring contract.
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78
So you are fine with Walmart not paying their full time employees enough of a living wage so that they are forced to live off government assistance?
There is no shifting of welfare costs here, if the people of Walmart are working employees, then they should be given at the minimum a living wage, or what's the point in working?
Or do you not want the poor working class off government welfare because you would have no one to blame about being on government welfare?
Yes. There is no reason to tie wages with "need". Period. This has zero basis in any type of rational economic theory. This whole thing is spin, once again.
There is a shifting of welfare costs here. The difference in the market wage and the mandated wage is in essence a form of welfare. It is a forced payment by the government. This is called abstract thought. Please try it.
/ironically, you all would rather pass these costs onto the low to middle income consumer than from taxes which are levied on a progressive scale.
Your "what is the point in working question" makes absolutely no sense. I don't make as much as I'd like. I still work. Because I make more than $0 when I do work.
You people are so narrowminded in your little pet theory here that you don't even consider the fact that were these people not hired by Wal-Mart, they would still be on welfare, and they would need MORE of it to survive. Has this thought even managed to cross your mind?
Wal-Mart is not solely responsible for these people's lives. Even the suggestion of such is absolutely absurd and should be tossed in the garbage bin with the rest of these nonsensical arguments, never to be repeated again.
Nobody with the brain capacity to do more than scan for keywords, jumble them together, and start spewing hyperbole should take this seriously.
Last edited by rw47; 07-11-2013 at 01:02 AM..
Reason: typos
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am sure you are down in the streets of DC really getting to know the people that live there. 
