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.
For starters, this entire theory hinges on the idea that by employing someone, Walmart is somehow entirely responsible for their well being. This is quite simply, ridiculous.
.
This pretty much sums up my stance, without the extra wording. Wal-Mart has had these jobs available for non-skilled persons for some time (so as fast food). Back in the 40s you could have no skill and work in a factory. . .and for a long time that was the case. Middle class job, with lower class skill level.
Wal-Mart is a teenager job. It is a single job. It is a working through college job. It isn't a "head of household job" and it seems crazy to ask wal-mart to pay the price of head of household for a job that doesn't demand the skill needed.
The economy shifted. . and these people can't get their low-skilled factory jobs anymore (move to China) so instead of keeping up with the skill requirement and getting a competing skill. . they either 1) collect disability 2) work at wal-mart and cry about it. . .or people cry for them
Just because the economy shifted and more heads of house hold are looking to work at wal-mart shouldn't make walmart change the job one iota. It isn't their responsibility. Maybe we should take a harder look at education. . .and transition.
One of the biggest "loopholes" are illegal aliens but it seems no one wants to close that one, just increase the headcount. There is no min wage in an underground economy. No taxes either. But hey, so long as their kids get tax payer funded benefits the family will eventually vote for those pushing to provide the freebies. The original illegals from 86 have kids that can vote.
And it is greedy employers who want them here so they can hire them and pay them wages below minimum. In fact, the illegal immigrant issue is caused and cultivated by greedy employers. Without work, the illegals would leave.
One example:
Quote:
What these employers want in the way of physical laborers are people who can’t read and won’t cost them a posting in either the local newspaper or a jobs board and ultimately won’t make any demands about hours, working conditions or a living wage out of fear of being deported. It’s the cheapskate, tightwad attitude of these employers which increases demand for illegal immigrants while Americans are out of work.
Once again, you resort to insults and a personal attack regarding what you think of my "intelligence."
Are you not capable of asserting your position without personal INSULTS? IMO, that "speaks volumes about you and your entire argument."
Does your "economic standpoint/theory" have a name?
I agree. The OP pulls a so called economic theory out of his derriere and insults anyone who actually posts facts to logically oppose his so called theory.
This pretty much sums up my stance, without the extra wording. Wal-Mart has had these jobs available for non-skilled persons for some time (so as fast food). Back in the 40s you could have no skill and work in a factory. . .and for a long time that was the case. Middle class job, with lower class skill level.
Wal-Mart is a teenager job. It is a single job. It is a working through college job. It isn't a "head of household job" and it seems crazy to ask wal-mart to pay the price of head of household for a job that doesn't demand the skill needed.
The economy shifted. . and these people can't get their low-skilled factory jobs anymore (move to China) so instead of keeping up with the skill requirement and getting a competing skill. . they either 1) collect disability 2) work at wal-mart and cry about it. . .or people cry for them
Just because the economy shifted and more heads of house hold are looking to work at wal-mart shouldn't make walmart change the job one iota. It isn't their responsibility. Maybe we should take a harder look at education. . .and transition.
U.S. Public education is strangle-held by Democrats/liberals and it's in VERY ugly shape.
Some background...
Quote:
The Ed School Crisis: Lessons Repeatedly Learned but Never Acted Upon
Scholars, journalists have been sounding the alarm for decades
Discusses the ugly and vapid history of pedagogy, plus how other schools in universities nationwide view their schools of education. Hint: it isn't kindly. The words "crayon curriculum" come to mind.
And look at the more recent TIMSS, PISA, etc. analyses. They confirm that the quality of U.S. public education has continued the downward a downward spiral for several decades, with the most damage done to the students with moderate and high potential.
"One of the more ominous findings in the latest study is that even the American students taking advanced courses could not measure up to students from other nations. In math, they ranked 15th out of 16 nations. In physics, U.S. seniors ranked dead last." U.S. Top Teens Rank at Bottom in Math, Science
"Even when they isolated students with at least one college-educated parent, they found only 10.3 percent reached the advanced level, a group still outperformed by all test-takers from 16 nations. 'That pinpoints the issue that we have to improve: our schools,' Hanushek said. 'We can’t just pretend that it’s all because of the parents.' " Stanford Daily | U.S. lags behind in advanced math scores
Look at the NAEP vs. State NCLB test comparisons. Not a single state educates even half of its students to bare-minimum very basic grade-level proficiency, with most hiding that fact by dumbing-down their NCLB tests year after year: NAEP Researchcenter - NAEP and State Equivalent Percent Table
There IS plenty of empirical data proving that the educational philosophies/methods implemented and used in U.S. public schools for the last 4 decades DO NOT WORK. The result has been a severely dumbed-down populace, with the greatest losses occurring among those who would have been middle class and even those who had the greatest potential - our most advanced and highest-ability students.
I agree. The OP pulls a so called economic theory out of his derriere and insults anyone who actually posts facts to logically oppose his so called theory.
My so called theory? HA. Yeah, that mythical nonsense. You know, like the idea that wages are determined by supply and demand.
There were NO facts posted in this entire thread that have in any way opposed anything in my OP. Nothing but repeated assertions of the same idiocy I have so thoroughly debunked, accusations of "Walmart loving," and other such rhetoric about greed and evil corporations.
You have nothing. Your subsidization argument is bunk and doesn't pass even the most basic logic test. This thread proves it. I laid it out for you, and you refuse to mount anything even resembling a cogent argument against anything I've said.
You guys are horrible at debate. Seriously. Absolutely horrible.
No you didn't. You haven't made a single argument.
I destroyed your subsidization theory in my OP. So unless you want to explain to me how need is related to wage rates, you have nothing.
Question: If welfare did not exist, would Walmart be forced to raise wages?
If welfare didn't exist, Walmart would lower their wages even more because they could. Right now, at least welfare offers people a competitive alternative to Walmart's low wages.
Question: What legitimate economic school of thought includes arbitrary variables such as living expenses in any theory that attempts to explain wage rates? According to living wage advocates Smith advocated that labor should receive an equitable share of what labor produces; According to Smith, this equitable share amounts to more than subsistence. Smith equated the interests of labor and the interests of land with overarching societal interests. He reasoned that as wages and rents rise, as a result of higher productivity, societal growth will occur thus increasing the quality of life for the greater part of its members............ Clary, B. (2009). Smith and Living Wages: Arguments in Support of a Mandated Living Wage. American Journal Of Economics & Sociology, 68(5), 1063-1084. doi:10.1111/j.1536-7150.2009.00653.x
I mentioned the TM threads because you used an all to familiar tactic in here, in which you pull out irrelevant facts in order to fluff up your arguments enough to completely avoid the central issue.
This pretty much sums up my stance, without the extra wording. Wal-Mart has had these jobs available for non-skilled persons for some time (so as fast food). Back in the 40s you could have no skill and work in a factory. . .and for a long time that was the case. Middle class job, with lower class skill level.
Wal-Mart is a teenager job. It is a single job. It is a working through college job. It isn't a "head of household job" and it seems crazy to ask wal-mart to pay the price of head of household for a job that doesn't demand the skill needed.
The economy shifted. . and these people can't get their low-skilled factory jobs anymore (move to China) so instead of keeping up with the skill requirement and getting a competing skill. . they either 1) collect disability 2) work at wal-mart and cry about it. . .or people cry for them
Just because the economy shifted and more heads of house hold are looking to work at wal-mart shouldn't make walmart change the job one iota. It isn't their responsibility. Maybe we should take a harder look at education. . .and transition.
Agreed and repped.
I think however that even if one were to take the position that a worker should be able to raise a family on a Walmart salary, this could still be accomplished without pinning the responsibility directly on Walmart and Walmart alone, with the extra consequences that would accompany such.
And regardless of the above, the subsidization argument is still invalid.
U.S. Public education is strangle-held by Democrats/liberals and it's in VERY ugly shape.
yeah, the problem is all democrats. The people you vote for are perfect. All democrats or liberals.
WTF, why do you even bother
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.
