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.
Their new store would hire hundreds of people and most importantly, they have to turn a profit, right? If they can't generate profit with their new store, they would have to close it or not even open it.
Not sure if I follow your point.
My point is we do not need 600 more shelf stuffers. We need the jobs making the shoes, televisions, etc. We should not give a company a tax break to move production jobs overseas to then turn around and sell the items here.
Bill just caused an "aha moment" for me. I've always been for a higher minimum wage. I'm also for the government helping people who need. But it is obviously very costly to tax payers. if we raise the minimum wage and companies like WalMart paid their employees a livable wage, their employees and millions of low wage workers wouldn't need our tax dollars for food stamps, healthcare, free school lunches, etc. Right now the American tax payer is picking up the slack. Bill Maher Takes On Minimum Wage: 'That Is Barely Enough To Gas Up The Car You're Living In' (VIDEO)
While I appreciate your sentiment, I am afraid you are not seeing the whole picture.
Low wages are not a result of minimum wage law and increasing the minimum wage will have unintended consequences. Minimum wage is a symptom and not the disease.
In the first place, low wages have 2 root causes.
The first is trade policy which allows corporations to produce goods offshore and sell them in the American market without tariffs which gives them every incentive to close factories in the US and open factories in low wage countries.
The second cause is the nation’s immigration policy which creates an oversupply of labor and as a result reduces the value of labor.
Technology is another factor which acts against to lower paid workers, as many jobs will increasingly be replaced by machines.
Increasing the minimum wage impacts neither of the root causes of low wages, and will result in higher prices and inflation which impact low wage earners at a disproportional rate.
It also acts as an incentive to employers to mechanize jobs, which exasperates the high unemployment, low wage scenario.
If you really want to help unemployment and low wages, you need to focus on the root causes and not the symptoms.
Bill just caused an "aha moment" for me. I've always been for a higher minimum wage. I'm also for the government helping people who need. But it is obviously very costly to tax payers. if we raise the minimum wage and companies like WalMart paid their employees a livable wage, their employees and millions of low wage workers wouldn't need our tax dollars for food stamps, healthcare, free school lunches, etc. Right now the American tax payer is picking up the slack. Bill Maher Takes On Minimum Wage: 'That Is Barely Enough To Gas Up The Car You're Living In' (VIDEO)
Another parade of callous disregard for others. Y'all must be right-wingers.
While the idea doesn't have merit in a vacuum, there are elements of righteous truth underlying Maher's shtick, which right-wingers, afflicted by excessive avarice, assuredly deny: The problem is, in a nutshell, there are inadequate living wage jobs where Americans live, and that that's partially due to how many highly-profitable businesses exploit the ability to shift some of the legitimate costs of labor onto the American taxpayer by paying inadequate wages for their employees to live on.
Right-wingers afflicted by egoistic avarice often make the point that such jobs as Maher was referring to are meant to be teenagers' first jobs or provide a little fun-money for retirees. Fine. Then put your money where your mouth is and limit those jobs to those folks. Don't presume to claim that there are jobs to be had, for folks trying to pay their own way and support their family, if the jobs you're referring to are jobs that, out of the other side of your mouth, you're claiming aren't meant for folks trying to pay their own way and support their family.
Stop trying to hide the abject selfishness of the right-wing claptrap in intricate mazes of logical fallacy, circular reasoning, and evasion of civic responsibility. You want people working to earn what they need to pay their own way? Me too. Let's make that happen. Don't make excuses. Don't equivocate. Don't whine about the cost to the taxpayer to make those jobs happen. Suck it up. Part of being a mature, conscientious adult is caring about something other than one's own comfort and luxury, and acknowledging the obligations to society that stem from being a beneficiary therefrom.
The reality is that our economy is not quite so simple as right-wingers make it out to be. There are complexities that preclude the right-wing's deliberately simplistic view of how people - real, live, thinking, feeling, worthwhile (despite inanely self-centered right-wing claims to the contrary) human beings - should gain access to the ability to pay their own way. The gap is society's fault - comprehensively. And society's paramount economic responsibility is to bridge the gap. Without excuses. Without equivocations. Without whining.
Ha! The "serious disregard" is to those that did the hard work, and now make a living wage. You want them to pay more, so that those that made poor life choices can take more?
That's BS. An employer can base wages on the basic cost of living in an area. A living wage may mean different things to different people, but that's no excuse to pay what is clearly not livable for anybody.
When a large segment of the area gets a large wage increase the cost of living in that area goes up. It then becomes something that feeds upon itself. Do you really not understand this?
Quote:
In many small towns in particular, they actually could.
Of course they could but they aren't.
Quote:
There was an article about this in my parents' town in Upstate NY when the community fought the construction of the area's first Wal-Mart. Local employers obviously had fewer employees but their full-time help was almost universally paid enough to live on locally. Collectively, the small businesses that were crushed by Wal-Mart employed more full-time workers than that Wal-Mart does now. Small business treats its workforce better than big corporations often do.
I support actions like the one in DC that would have made the minimum wage requirement significantly higher for big-box retailers. I'd say it's a fair penalty for the damage they do.
These are nothing but vast generalizations. Very small mom and pop businesses are exempt from minimum wage laws and do indeed pay less than minimum wage in some cases.
Another parade of callous disregard for others. Y'all must be right-wingers.
While the idea doesn't have merit in a vacuum, there are elements of righteous truth underlying Maher's shtick, which right-wingers, afflicted by excessive avarice, assuredly deny: The problem is, in a nutshell, there are inadequate living wage jobs where Americans live, and that that's partially due to how many highly-profitable businesses exploit the ability to shift some of the legitimate costs of labor onto the American taxpayer by paying inadequate wages for their employees to live on.
Right-wingers afflicted by egoistic avarice often make the point that such jobs as Maher was referring to are meant to be teenagers' first jobs or provide a little fun-money for retirees. Fine. Then put your money where your mouth is and limit those jobs to those folks. Don't presume to claim that there are jobs to be had, for folks trying to pay their own way and support their family, if the jobs you're referring to are jobs that, out of the other side of your mouth, you're claiming aren't meant for folks trying to pay their own way and support their family.
Stop trying to hide the abject selfishness of the right-wing claptrap in intricate mazes of logical fallacy, circular reasoning, and evasion of civic responsibility. You want people working to earn what they need to pay their own way? Me too. Let's make that happen. Don't make excuses. Don't equivocate. Don't whine about the cost to the taxpayer to make those jobs happen. Suck it up. Part of being a mature, conscientious adult is caring about something other than one's own comfort and luxury, and acknowledging the obligations to society that stem from being a beneficiary therefrom.
The reality is that our economy is not quite so simple as right-wingers make it out to be. There are complexities that preclude the right-wing's deliberately simplistic view of how people - real, live, thinking, feeling, worthwhile (despite inanely self-centered right-wing claims to the contrary) human beings - should gain access to the ability to pay their own way. The gap is society's fault - comprehensively. And society's paramount economic responsibility is to bridge the gap. Without excuses. Without equivocations. Without whining.
You talk about "not making excuses", then devote a complete paragraph to excuses why folks can't pay their own way. Rich.....
Location: Just transplanted to FL from the N GA mountains
3,997 posts, read 4,143,759 times
Reputation: 2677
I got a silly question.... Why can't Wal-mart help to bring our production back? Let me explain... When you go to Wal-mart and you pick up the store brand "Home Goods" you see its made in China. If Wal-mart were to start promoting "Made in the USA" like it did years ago, wouldn't that in itself help our economy? Let's face it... if the Wal-mart executives would get on board, make an effort to promote, stock, sell, and yes purchase inventory from our American workers wouldn't we all benefit? The sheer number of Wal-mart stores, their distribution system and the fact that most American people shop regularly at their stores could help us couldn't it? Granted the price might be a few cents higher, but Wal-mart itself with its bulk buying power and it's ability for merchandising it correctly could "sell" it to the American people as the right thing to do... Buy American.
I guess what I'm try to say badly I admit.. I for the life of me, can't understand why Wal-mart, who had as much to do with the loss of American Jobs as anyone, can't step up and help undo that mess that they helped to create. It seems that we all want solutions, but are unwilling to see that sometimes the one who created the problems are ultimately the only ones who can fix it. I would think, long-term, Wal-mart would benefit eventually gaining the trust of the American people, still make a profit for the shareholders and the Walton's, and help to bring back jobs to the US in the way of manufacturing goods-n-services, and yes eventually perhaps raising their employee wages. Maybe it's time we citizens start demanding they carry "Made in the US" again?
Bill just caused an "aha moment" for me. I've always been for a higher minimum wage. I'm also for the government helping people who need. But it is obviously very costly to tax payers. if we raise the minimum wage and companies like WalMart paid their employees a livable wage, their employees and millions of low wage workers wouldn't need our tax dollars for food stamps, healthcare, free school lunches, etc. Right now the American tax payer is picking up the slack. Bill Maher Takes On Minimum Wage: 'That Is Barely Enough To Gas Up The Car You're Living In' (VIDEO)
This is incorrect - in fact, you would be putting people out of work with this theory.
Crude example.
Company A uses a certain percentage of its sales to pay workers. Let's say that works out to $4,000 to be split among 10 workers.
Employees earn $10/hr - so for a 40 hour week, that's $400... multiplied by 10 workers equals $4,000.
Government says - workers must be paid $20.00 per hour.
Company A's sales still stay the same, and there is $4,000 to be allocated to the employees. - but they have to be paid a $20.00 living wage. Guess what - can't pay 10 workers at $20.00 per hour. It's not in the budget. $4,000 will only allow for 5 workers to be paid.
Employees now earn $20/hr - so for a 40 hour week, that's $800... multiplied by 5 workers equals $4,000.
The increased wages just sent 5 workers to unemployment to collect tax funded unemployment insurance for 99 weeks - which defeats your whole purpose.
While I appreciate your sentiment, I am afraid you are not seeing the whole picture.
Low wages are not a result of minimum wage law and increasing the minimum wage will have unintended consequences. Minimum wage is a symptom and not the disease.
In the first place, low wages have 2 root causes.
The first is trade policy which allows corporations to produce goods offshore and sell them in the American market without tariffs which gives them every incentive to close factories in the US and open factories in low wage countries.
The second cause is the nation’s immigration policy which creates an oversupply of labor and as a result reduces the value of labor.
Technology is another factor which acts against to lower paid workers, as many jobs will increasingly be replaced by machines.
Increasing the minimum wage impacts neither of the root causes of low wages, and will result in higher prices and inflation which impact low wage earners at a disproportional rate.
It also acts as an incentive to employers to mechanize jobs, which exasperates the high unemployment, low wage scenario.
If you really want to help unemployment and low wages, you need to focus on the root causes and not the symptoms.
Several good points, to which I will add a few more. The problem with immigration policy is not the oversupply of labor (during normal non-recession times), it is the illegal status of the workers. The employers that are willing to hire illegal worker are also willing to use their illegal status to force lower wages. That in turn forces those companies that compete against that employee to keep their cost down. The easiest solution is to reduce or remove that illegal status of those workers. Once the leveral is gone, wages will raise.
Jobs are moved oversea for many reasons, wage are only a small part. Tax, environment and other government regulation are more of a factor. Tariffs will only increase costs of the goods in the US. The company will still make the product outside the US for shipping to the rest of the world.
The report also attempts to paint the companies as passing cost onto the taxpayer. The cost is being pass on by the worker. The worker that doesn't have the skills or work ethic necessary to support themselves. If it was the company, then the workers would simply leave and find higher paid jobs elsewhere. What we need to address is why people don't have the skills or work ethic necessary to move up in the world and not support those faults by artificially inflating their earnings.
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.
