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.
And it seems odd to me that even though it has been pointed out multiple times in this thread, people still don't understand that this was employees helping other employees just like they do at jobs all across the world. This was not a corporate policy.
It has absolutely nothing to do with how much Walmart pays its employees. It's just people helping people. You find this activity in all walks of life. When an employee of a company suffers a hardship, their coworkers contribute money to help them.
When a guy at my job Tony had his house flooded, I contributed money to a fund the team sent to help him out. Then when I became disabled, Tony contributed money to a fund the team sent to me to help me out. It's just what decent people do.
Both conservatives and liberals are supportive of the wholesale serfdom of the American middle class.
Conservatives are stuck several decades back and think that just being hands off and letting most people slowly die on poverty wages while the top 1-2% own most of the wealth is somehow going to be a good thing for the country.
Liberals are hands on, but in the wrong way. All they have to offer is further government assistance, which is treating the symptom rather than the problem. It just perpetuates it.
Neither is helping Americans, and both will result in the long-term decline of the nation over the next several decades.
BOOM. Consider yourself repped.
Which party is for the middle class? Answer - NEITHER.
I think you need to figure out the reality that there are no other jobs for large swaths of these Americans.
Typical conservative, still stuck in the 1950s. You probably think this is a country with plenty of opportunity and that anyone can "pull themselves up by their bootstraps" if they just want to. That used to be true, but it's not anymore.
And for your information, I am ten years into a Silicon Valley corporate finance career track, and there's a good chance that I make more than you. I'm one of the people in the top marginal tax brackets who has "made it", but I'm not as naive or pig-headed as to assume that the path I took is viable for all but a small group.
Great nations need good jobs to employ the masses, not just the elite. Most people are not going to be a Steve Jobs or be able to get advanced degrees and get into the "information economy."
Okdie dokie Mr. Gecko.
I'll just languish here in the Central Valley with my landscape construction 6 figure income.
I probably landscaped a few of those banks or corporate headquarters in SV that your guarding at night.
When those sprinklers come on at 2:00am as your making your rounds you can think of me.
So what exactly is a "living wage"? If I want to "live" by owning a 6000 sf house, drive a luxury vehicle or three, take a couple of pricey vacations every year, wear designer clothes, eat in fancy restaurants - should my employer pay me enough to live that way?
No business exists to provide a certain lifestyle to anyone. They exist to sell a product or service, for a fee. If they become successful, they will need more employees, as a byproduct of that success. Period.
How about enough so that they would not need government assistance for starters, which is in most cases below the poverty line.
It's actually kind of silly to concentrate on a Thanksgiving dinner.
Most components of a traditional dinner are at such low sale prices that those "in need" could probably eat cheaper then than any regular day.
And as far as that dumb "living wage" nonsense, must be some employees are living well enough to contribute to those that might not be.
Everyone at Walmart does not have the same family size and does not get paid the same. The living wage should be applied as it relates to the poverty line in that particuliar area
Why not look at the employees instead of Walmart.
Walmart hired them; they applied to Walmart.
If they don't like the min wage salary they are free to quit and go elsewhere.
FF/retail has a 75% turnover rate.
You're all acting like these are slave workers making no money.
This is the US folks.
Walmart, just like Target, Kohl's and Macy's is doing nothing wrong and are following all the laws.
It's really not that easy. Have you seen some of the people working at Walmart? They're not very bright, and Walmart hires them knowing nobody else likely will. Walmart is sometimes the only job some of these people can get, so it's Walmart or live 100% off the government.
Had to bold some because I'm sure someone will accuse me of saying all Walmart employees are stupid. Actually, I'm not saying any of them are stupid; but some are obviously slow.
So, liberals don't shop at Home Depot? Lowe's? Walmart? Target? Office Depot? Office Max? Petco? Best Buy?
I find that hard to believe.
Are any of you Leftists on here aware of Hilary Clintons involvement with Walmart?
Of course it's hard to believe, because it's not true. Millions of Liberals shop at Walmart, I bet even some of the posters on this board who are complaining also shop at Walmart.
There's a simple free market method for Wal-Mart workers to get a living wage. It's called unionization.
Sent from my SPH-L300 using Tapatalk 2
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.
