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 was watching the news last night and caught the latest update on the Walmart war that Washington, D.C. has decided to wage. For those that haven't heard about this, the city council has voted to ban Walmart unless they pay their workers at least $12.50 per hour. They're just waiting for the Mayor to sign off on the bill. I believe Walmart has plans for 3 stores in the D.C. area, all in the economically lower areas. The city council's argument is that because Walmart pays low wages, their workers qualify for government assistance and they are therefore subsidizing Walmart.
This is a great example of how a city council can shoot themselves in the foot when they legislate with feelings instead of common sense. Just for a moment, let's assume that the Mayor caves in to political pressure and passes the bill to require Walmart to pay $12.50 an hour in the D.C. area. This leaves Walmart with 2 choices. One, they can pay their unskilled employees in the area an amount of money that is commensurate with the wages that a 2 year college graduate or skilled tradesman would receive at their first job. Two, they can decide that opening new stores in the D.C. area isn't worth the investment or the legislative hassle due to insane labor costs. As a corporation whose goal is to make profits, the likely choice is that they will pass on the D.C. area stores and move on down the road.
At this point, instead of having 3 new stores with +/-400 employees each in the D.C. area, there will be 0 new stores with 0 employees in the D.C. area. Which scenario costs the city more money, 3 stores with a total of 1200 employees who are partially subsidized by government assistance or 0 stores with 0 employees and those 1200 people being completely subsidized by government assistance? Anyone who is capable of doing math and has the slightest bit of common sense should be able to see the idiocy behind targeting one company and forcing them to pay wages which are far higher than what the average Walmart employee should reasonably expect to make.
You're actually correct on one point which I bolded.
It's about corporate profits only.
Walmart doesn't care about it's customer base because it has the dubious distinction of having millions and millions of customers, and if they tick off just 10 or 20 or 100, it's no great loss to them, there's more where that came from.
It's true though, many people who are Walmart employees, a family residing next to me, is receiving government assistance because they can't make ends meet on what Walmart offers as a wage. I know my neighbors well, and they hardly ever complain, gosh, they must be conservatives.
If they didn't have their Walmart job, do you think they would qualify for less or more government subsidies?
I read a story about Chicago and they were pressuring Walmart in the same way and of course the company took action. Instead of building in Chicago city limits Walmart when a couple of miles down the road to a suburb. The store is still on a main shopping strip but instead of the city of Chicago getting the tax revenue the suburb is reaping it. When will it be before the left understands the simple concept of action- re action?
I was watching the news last night and caught the latest update on the Walmart war that Washington, D.C. has decided to wage. For those that haven't heard about this, the city council has voted to ban Walmart unless they pay their workers at least $12.50 per hour. They're just waiting for the Mayor to sign off on the bill. I believe Walmart has plans for 3 stores in the D.C. area, all in the economically lower areas. The city council's argument is that because Walmart pays low wages, their workers qualify for government assistance and they are therefore subsidizing Walmart.
This is a great example of how a city council can shoot themselves in the foot when they legislate with feelings instead of common sense. Just for a moment, let's assume that the Mayor caves in to political pressure and passes the bill to require Walmart to pay $12.50 an hour in the D.C. area. This leaves Walmart with 2 choices. One, they can pay their unskilled employees in the area an amount of money that is commensurate with the wages that a 2 year college graduate or skilled tradesman would receive at their first job. Two, they can decide that opening new stores in the D.C. area isn't worth the investment or the legislative hassle due to insane labor costs. As a corporation whose goal is to make profits, the likely choice is that they will pass on the D.C. area stores and move on down the road.
At this point, instead of having 3 new stores with +/-400 employees each in the D.C. area, there will be 0 new stores with 0 employees in the D.C. area. Which scenario costs the city more money, 3 stores with a total of 1200 employees who are partially subsidized by government assistance or 0 stores with 0 employees and those 1200 people being completely subsidized by government assistance? Anyone who is capable of doing math and has the slightest bit of common sense should be able to see the idiocy behind targeting one company and forcing them to pay wages which are far higher than what the average Walmart employee should reasonably expect to make.
This is little more than an appeal to the base, which despite what you see on TV, in DC is mostly poor, uneducated, completely ignorant of economics, and most importantly, extremely gullible.
I read a story about Chicago and they were pressuring Walmart in the same way and of course the company took action. Instead of building in Chicago city limits Walmart when a couple of miles down the road to a suburb. The store is still on a main shopping strip but instead of the city of Chicago getting the tax revenue the suburb is reaping it. When will it be before the left understands the simple concept of action- re action?
You don't do rational things, when your motivation is hatred.
Alinsky rule 12 is all about hating... And this is what to do when you hate someone - you make it personal:
Quote:
Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.
Liberals don't "disagree" with, and debate their political opposition, they spread hatred and prejudice. For instance, liberals NEVER debate Palin's policy statements. Instead, they ridicule with lies, and attempt to publicly trash the person who they want to associate with the prejudicial hatred they foment toward Palin.
This is why they spout "teabagger" "caribou barbie" and other such personalized invective. They don't ever debate the validity of Obamacare policies, for instance, they just scream that anyone who disagrees hates poor people having health care and loves evil insurance companies. It's always personal, and it's always about hurting someone personally.
In the Dem playbook there always has to be an oppressor and a victim.
Every issue has an enemy and a victim.
Stop buying into the propaganda.
Walmart is doing nothing illegal.
If you don't like low wages then go talk to your Congress critter. Either tell them raise min wage or tell them to nationalize all business.
This is little more than an appeal to the base, which despite what you see on TV, in DC is mostly poor, uneducated, completely ignorant of economics, and most importantly, extremely gullible.
Very true, and the latest buzz is that the Mayor is going to veto it anyway. The city council leader, however, is trying to get the 9 vote super majority required to override the veto. The bill passed on a vote of 8-5, so he's fairly close. At the very least, it will be interesting to see what happens.
The Wal-Mart and fast-food workers are going to lose this battle. No one's forcing them to work at either place. Considering education or (gasp!) a trade, and having a family only when you can support them might be the better route to financial security.
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.
