Why Hate Walmart?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
83

[quote]orion wrote:
Not this minimum wage bullshit again.

Do you guys seriously still not get that a minimum wage law is not a mandatory employment law?

If you are not worth the new and improved minimum wage you will lose you job, that is all that is going to happen.[/quote]

It’s about ethics and intention. The letter of the law can always be altered to meet the desires of certain interest groups, usually the ones holding all the loot in order to spite the ethics and intention of whatever justice the law is supposed to serve. Are we playing this game?

84

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]treco wrote:

…Funny how you are standing up for Walmart based on 1 19 y/o that you know…

[/quote]

I’m not standing up for Walmart per se. I’m standing against people who want government to tinker with every damn thing under the sun so as to get Goldilocks’ porridge “just right.”[/quote]

Eh… I don’t get this. So you believe the greedy ones are the laborers getting paid poverty wages? You buy the talking points hook line and sinker? Pay the little guys minimum wage, so I can make an extra 500k on top of the 50 mil I already make, thank God because I need that 500k for a rainy day, never know when you really need a trip to Paris with the mistress, she likes diamonds you know… Really, do the people that are making the extra money from cheap labor need that extra money more than the laborer does?

85

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
Not this minimum wage bullshit again.

Do you guys seriously still not get that a minimum wage law is not a mandatory employment law?

If you are not worth the new and improved minimum wage you will lose you job, that is all that is going to happen.[/quote]

It’s about ethics and intention. The letter of the law can always be altered to meet the desires of certain interest groups, usually the ones holding all the loot in order to spite the ethics and intention of whatever justice the law is supposed to serve. Are we playing this game?[/quote]

What is that even supposed to mean?

If you mandate 7$ an hour and some people are only worth 5$, they no get job.

Period, end of story.

86

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
Not this minimum wage bullshit again.

Do you guys seriously still not get that a minimum wage law is not a mandatory employment law?

If you are not worth the new and improved minimum wage you will lose you job, that is all that is going to happen.[/quote]

It’s about ethics and intention. The letter of the law can always be altered to meet the desires of certain interest groups, usually the ones holding all the loot in order to spite the ethics and intention of whatever justice the law is supposed to serve. Are we playing this game?[/quote]

What is that even supposed to mean?

If you mandate 7$ an hour and some people are only worth 5$, they no get job.

Period, end of story. [/quote]

Why stop at 5? Why just say the work is only worth .25 an hour? Besides, what sort of labor is worth 5 bucks an hour anyhow, that’s so much money. I mean, that dude who stocks shelves all day, who will probably have carpal problems when he’s 35, his job cant be that hard. All he does is move heavy palates all day and stock shelves. Is this the guy you are talking about?

Or are you talking about the elderly person who HAS to work to supplement their income, or they would have to take out a reverse mortgage which is designed to swindle them from the small home they worked hard to earn and own, and want to pass on to their kin?

I cant even think of a job that is only worth 5 bucks an hour. I mean, modeling is really easy but it pays so damned well. Who decides what is worth what? Someone decided my grandfathers labor in some fields was worth pennies back in the day… So excuse me if I look at your $5 claim and chortle.

87

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
Not this minimum wage bullshit again.

Do you guys seriously still not get that a minimum wage law is not a mandatory employment law?

If you are not worth the new and improved minimum wage you will lose you job, that is all that is going to happen.[/quote]

It’s about ethics and intention. The letter of the law can always be altered to meet the desires of certain interest groups, usually the ones holding all the loot in order to spite the ethics and intention of whatever justice the law is supposed to serve. Are we playing this game?[/quote]

What is that even supposed to mean?

If you mandate 7$ an hour and some people are only worth 5$, they no get job.

Period, end of story. [/quote]

Why stop at 5? Why just say the work is only worth .25 an hour? Besides, what sort of labor is worth 5 bucks an hour anyhow, that’s so much money. I mean, that dude who stocks shelves all day, who will probably have carpal problems when he’s 35, his job cant be that hard. All he does is move heavy palates all day and stock shelves. Is this the guy you are talking about?

Or are you talking about the elderly person who HAS to work to supplement their income, or they would have to take out a reverse mortgage which is designed to swindle them from the small home they worked hard to earn and own, and want to pass on to their kin?

I cant even think of a job that is only worth 5 bucks an hour. I mean, modeling is really easy but it pays so damned well. Who decides what is worth what? Someone decided my grandfathers labor in some fields was worth pennies back in the day… So excuse me if I look at your $5 claim and chortle. [/quote]

Again, what are you talking about?

Wages are determined by productivity.

There is no magic wage fairy determining the price of labor.

You iz producing 5$ of worth an hour, you no make more.

88

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
Not this minimum wage bullshit again.

Do you guys seriously still not get that a minimum wage law is not a mandatory employment law?

If you are not worth the new and improved minimum wage you will lose you job, that is all that is going to happen.[/quote]

It’s about ethics and intention. The letter of the law can always be altered to meet the desires of certain interest groups, usually the ones holding all the loot in order to spite the ethics and intention of whatever justice the law is supposed to serve. Are we playing this game?[/quote]

What is that even supposed to mean?

If you mandate 7$ an hour and some people are only worth 5$, they no get job.

Period, end of story. [/quote]

Why stop at 5? Why just say the work is only worth .25 an hour? Besides, what sort of labor is worth 5 bucks an hour anyhow, that’s so much money. I mean, that dude who stocks shelves all day, who will probably have carpal problems when he’s 35, his job cant be that hard. All he does is move heavy palates all day and stock shelves. Is this the guy you are talking about?

Or are you talking about the elderly person who HAS to work to supplement their income, or they would have to take out a reverse mortgage which is designed to swindle them from the small home they worked hard to earn and own, and want to pass on to their kin?

I cant even think of a job that is only worth 5 bucks an hour. I mean, modeling is really easy but it pays so damned well. Who decides what is worth what? Someone decided my grandfathers labor in some fields was worth pennies back in the day… So excuse me if I look at your $5 claim and chortle. [/quote]

Again, what are you talking about?

Wages are determined by productivity.

There is no magic wage fairy determining the price of labor.

You iz producing 5$ of worth an hour, you no make more.

[/quote]

What are you talking about?

You make the claim that wages are determined by productivity. Then where do I collect my wages when I was working 12+ hour shifts 7 days a week as an e3 with an e7 billet as a quality assurance inspector of aircraft maintenance? Hardest I ever worked, least I was ever paid.

Now, please explain your claim about wages determining productivity. This is rich :smiley:

89

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
Not this minimum wage bullshit again.

Do you guys seriously still not get that a minimum wage law is not a mandatory employment law?

If you are not worth the new and improved minimum wage you will lose you job, that is all that is going to happen.[/quote]

It’s about ethics and intention. The letter of the law can always be altered to meet the desires of certain interest groups, usually the ones holding all the loot in order to spite the ethics and intention of whatever justice the law is supposed to serve. Are we playing this game?[/quote]

What is that even supposed to mean?

If you mandate 7$ an hour and some people are only worth 5$, they no get job.

Period, end of story. [/quote]

Why stop at 5? Why just say the work is only worth .25 an hour? Besides, what sort of labor is worth 5 bucks an hour anyhow, that’s so much money. I mean, that dude who stocks shelves all day, who will probably have carpal problems when he’s 35, his job cant be that hard. All he does is move heavy palates all day and stock shelves. Is this the guy you are talking about?

Or are you talking about the elderly person who HAS to work to supplement their income, or they would have to take out a reverse mortgage which is designed to swindle them from the small home they worked hard to earn and own, and want to pass on to their kin?

I cant even think of a job that is only worth 5 bucks an hour. I mean, modeling is really easy but it pays so damned well. Who decides what is worth what? Someone decided my grandfathers labor in some fields was worth pennies back in the day… So excuse me if I look at your $5 claim and chortle. [/quote]

Again, what are you talking about?

Wages are determined by productivity.

There is no magic wage fairy determining the price of labor.

You iz producing 5$ of worth an hour, you no make more.

[/quote]

What are you talking about?

You make the claim that wages are determined by productivity. Then where do I collect my wages when I was working 12+ hour shifts 7 days a week as an e3 with an e7 billet as a quality assurance inspector of aircraft maintenance? Hardest I ever worked, least I was ever paid.

Now, please explain your claim about wages determining productivity. This is rich :smiley:
[/quote]

From the one employing you?

Should you be worth more, go somehwere else and demand what you are worth.

If they are not willing to pay, you probably arent.

90

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
Not this minimum wage bullshit again.

Do you guys seriously still not get that a minimum wage law is not a mandatory employment law?

If you are not worth the new and improved minimum wage you will lose you job, that is all that is going to happen.[/quote]

It’s about ethics and intention. The letter of the law can always be altered to meet the desires of certain interest groups, usually the ones holding all the loot in order to spite the ethics and intention of whatever justice the law is supposed to serve. Are we playing this game?[/quote]

What is that even supposed to mean?

If you mandate 7$ an hour and some people are only worth 5$, they no get job.

Period, end of story. [/quote]

Why stop at 5? Why just say the work is only worth .25 an hour? Besides, what sort of labor is worth 5 bucks an hour anyhow, that’s so much money. I mean, that dude who stocks shelves all day, who will probably have carpal problems when he’s 35, his job cant be that hard. All he does is move heavy palates all day and stock shelves. Is this the guy you are talking about?

Or are you talking about the elderly person who HAS to work to supplement their income, or they would have to take out a reverse mortgage which is designed to swindle them from the small home they worked hard to earn and own, and want to pass on to their kin?

I cant even think of a job that is only worth 5 bucks an hour. I mean, modeling is really easy but it pays so damned well. Who decides what is worth what? Someone decided my grandfathers labor in some fields was worth pennies back in the day… So excuse me if I look at your $5 claim and chortle. [/quote]

Again, what are you talking about?

Wages are determined by productivity.

There is no magic wage fairy determining the price of labor.

You iz producing 5$ of worth an hour, you no make more.

[/quote]

What are you talking about?

You make the claim that wages are determined by productivity. Then where do I collect my wages when I was working 12+ hour shifts 7 days a week as an e3 with an e7 billet as a quality assurance inspector of aircraft maintenance? Hardest I ever worked, least I was ever paid.

Now, please explain your claim about wages determining productivity. This is rich :smiley:
[/quote]

From the one employing you?

Should you be worth more, go somehwere else and demand what you are worth.

If they are not willing to pay, you probably arent. [/quote]

Right, because in your little world employers know what is a right, and just wage for a persons labor. :smiley: Especially considering entities like corporation have a tendency to be intrinsically psychopathic, I mean they are people and all. According to a psychopath who looks at you purely as a means to an end, what do you think you are worth? I’ll answer this one for you, you are worth the least I can get away with paying you, and no more. If I can drive the wage down lower so I can pocket more money, that would be great, since I’m a psychopath and am flawed to the point I only ever think of myself and my own ends, and believe this is the only way I ever should think as well.

Just so happens that people have demanded better wages, and the corporation has threatened them with lawsuits for threatening the companies profits. It’s such a cool thing to threaten a poverty wage earning person with a lawsuit, I mean they have soo much to lose right? It must be nice to have some inborn sense of justice in terms of what a right and fair wage might be. I hope I was born with it too, because I can’t seem to locate the organ which determines this on my own body or within my own consciousness.

Maybe it only comes out when you become rich and self important? For the record, I get paid what I believe my work is worth. I work for a privately owned company with a great boss, very private family guy who cares about his employees and to my knowledge is a Churchgoing guy. Part of what I do is make sure the place doesn’t burn down. I’ll work my ass off for this man because he treats me with some dignity, I’ve already gone beyond my pay to make sure things don’t happen to his property because I appreciate my workplace and have pride in myself and what I do.

I cant say the same if I were working for a corporation that was looking at me, then the bottom line and trying to figure out what they could get away with and still have me be minimally functional as an employee.

91

[quote]treco wrote:
Article I Section 8 gives ability to regulate commerce,
US v Darby (1940) shot down the argument federal min wage was unconstitutional

Look - my point of view is that “The workman is worthy of his wage” and I followed that in my pay scale.
Since companies don’t do that in select industries, the government does it for them.

Funny how you are standing up for Walmart based on 1 19 y/o that you know. They and all of their ilk (Lowes, Home Depot, any big box store basically) consider employees to be a barely tolerable liability line item.
They fire workers for going to a funeral of a close relative. They have workers go home after 2 hours , so as to not exceed hours to be held liable for having a full time worker. They don’t pay for crap to the vast majority of their ‘associates’.
I only know these things from having a non ending stream of their employees trying to come to work at my place for years.

[/quote]

How many employees of yours bought stock in your company and retired millionaires? For that matter, is your company still up and running?

92

[quote]Severiano wrote:

Right, because in your little world employers know what is a right, and just wage for a persons labor. :smiley: [/quote]

Exactly.

Who else would.

Your work is worth what someone is willing to pay for it, therefore it is determined by those who are willing to pay for it.

93

[quote]orion wrote:
Again, what are you talking about?

Wages are determined by productivity.

There is no magic wage fairy determining the price of labor.

You iz producing 5$ of worth an hour, you no make more.

[/quote]

Who exactly determines what each worker is producing an hour? Is there some sort of committee? Are we talking complicated mathematical calculations here? Are we sure that a Walmart employee is producing $7.10 and not $7.50? How are we sure? Is it that elusive genius known as the market? What calculations does he use to come to his infallible conclusions? Has he ever been wrong?

Or is it more like, “alight, I’ve got to put somebody behind my cash register…the desperate fucks around here will settle for $6 an hour, don’t you think?”

According to your logic, there are no fair or unfair wages. All wages are and should be exactly what they are. Surely this logical rhyme and reason in wage determination is not a specifically American phenomenon. It applies just as well to a Cambodian child cutting fake leather for Nike shoes at $11/week, right?

I’m not big on ensuring that people make “a fair living” beyond what they already earn in this country. But let’s not pretend that all wages are Goldilocks-perfect bowls of porridge–perfect and precise reflections of what their earners produce–and ipso facto fair without room for doubt or debate.

94

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]treco wrote:

…Funny how you are standing up for Walmart based on 1 19 y/o that you know…

[/quote]

I’m not standing up for Walmart per se. I’m standing against people who want government to tinker with every damn thing under the sun so as to get Goldilocks’ porridge “just right.”[/quote]

Eh… I don’t get this. So you believe the greedy ones are the laborers getting paid poverty wages? You buy the talking points hook line and sinker? Pay the little guys minimum wage, so I can make an extra 500k on top of the 50 mil I already make, thank God because I need that 500k for a rainy day, never know when you really need a trip to Paris with the mistress, she likes diamonds you know… Really, do the people that are making the extra money from cheap labor need that extra money more than the laborer does?

[/quote]

Talk about talking points. What does need have to do with it? Does that employee have a “right” to a job at Wal-Mart? In America, no one is forced to work anywhere. It’s a mutual choice between you and the employer and your pay is based on the value you add to the organization. Why would a company pay a person twice the minimum wage for a job that can be automated? If Wal-Mart did that, their 3.5% profit margin would decrease even further which would negatively impact their stock price. And since you don’t realize, based on your ignorance of economics, a 3.5% profit margin is a paltry number. Wal-Mart makes money on sheer volume.

95

[quote]smh23 wrote:
Or is it more like, “alight, I’ve got to put somebody behind my cash register…the desperate fucks around here will settle for $6 an hour, don’t you think?”[/quote]

Depends on the industry, cost of living in the area, ROI needs, government regulation and owner’s need.

For a small start up mom and pop it is as simple as putting an ad in the paper, and seeing what wages people will do the work you need done for. Once a company is the size of a WalMart, yes more complicated math is involved.

Most people that don’t work on the “other side” don’t understand how expensive labor is. You cost your employer anywhere from 20-50% more than your actual wage. (Union labor being much closer to the 50% than the 20%.) So that means if somone makes 50k a year they actually cost the company between 60k and 75k a year to employ.

Are there evil people that think like you posted? “desperate fucks”? Sure. Are they the majority like some in this thread like to assume, no. But what no one running a business is going to do is take all the risk, and yes there is quite a bit, only to loss money by paying people more than the value they add.

Most employers give employees that go above and beyond for them a raise. 99.9% of employers covet talent. And a vast majority of the time, talent doesn’t stay stocking shelves or running a till, they move up.

Someone without talent, without skill and no intention to learn either of the two, are going to make less than those that do.

Yes. Can that child make more in a different company? Is there any other way for this child to provide for himself?

We in America like to act like there aren’t a billion people in India that are so poor they will never see an automobile in their life, let alone shit in a toilet, that would be a 1000x better off making $11 a week making shoes. If only because this will lead to the same situation that happened in America with the birth of the Union during the industrial revolution.

If there are “unfair” wages, it is up to the people (also part of the market) to effect changes in the market. They do this by working for companies that take care of them, like was mentioned above by the kid that contradicted his entire point with his story about his working past. If a campany can’t find talent because its wages are too low it has two options: go under or pay more.

On the other side, if a company pays too much its prices are going to be too high, sales will go down and people will lose their jobs so prices can come down. Wages determine how many people you can hire, as well as prices of goods and services.

No one is doing this. We are actually talking about letting the market dictate the changes is wages, not some outside force (government) picking and choosing what changes the wages.

96

[quote]Severiano wrote:
Really, do the people that are making the extra money from cheap labor need that extra money more than the laborer does?

[/quote]

Sorry to burst your bubble but need doesn’t matter.

Life isn’t easy. It isn’t fair and no, not everyone gets a trophy.

The laborer can stay working where they are working or go to a better company to try and improve their situation. Just because someone else makes more than the laborer doesn’t mean they have an obligation to give the laborer the money they earned.

97

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]treco wrote:

…Funny how you are standing up for Walmart based on 1 19 y/o that you know…

[/quote]

I’m not standing up for Walmart per se. I’m standing against people who want government to tinker with every damn thing under the sun so as to get Goldilocks’ porridge “just right.”[/quote]

Pretty much this in a nutshell.

In my soon to be 33 years on this Earth, I would be surprised if I have spent more than $200 in a WalMart. I don’t support them, but I don’t support the government getting involved or socially constructed “fair”.

98

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
A good post.
[/quote]

Well, I was taking a specific shot at Orion’s wording (which absolutely implied that wages are necessarily reflective of productivity, and inerrantly so), but I’ll say this:

–“Are there evil people that think like you posted? “desperate fucks”? Sure. Are they the majority like some in this thread like to assume, no.”

I agree. I don’t mean to imply that the Man is always out to fuck the little guy. I simply want to make the point that Orion’s blanket acceptance of wages as logically determined is simplistic. As I said, I’m not big on the idea that everybody is entitled to a comfortable life and therefore a great wage.

–“We in America like to act like there aren’t a billion people in India that are so poor they will never see an automobile in their life, let alone shit in a toilet, that would be a 1000x better off making $11 a week making shoes.”

True to an extent. I’ve been to some…let’s call them facilities that employ children at low wages…in Southeast Asia. They are what they are, but I can assure you that you don’t walk out of a basement in Saigon where a kid cuts cloth for pennies in sweltering heat thinking, “this is all logical and fair.”

–“If there are “unfair” wages, it is up to the people (also part of the market) to effect changes in the market.”

If government is representative of “the people,” then this sounds like it can be twisted into an admission that minimum wage laws are warranted.

Good post all in all. And I haven’t had the courage to bring it up yet, but how 'bout that Thanksgiving night game? Jesus. I’m still avoiding wearing any Jets merchandise in public.

99

[quote]smh23 wrote:
If government is representative of “the people,” then this sounds like it can be twisted into an admission that minimum wage laws are warranted.[/quote]

In today’s world? I think you need a minimum wage because the government has its fingers dug so deep in all the other aspects of the market you couldn’t only eliminate the minimum wage.

I’m not a “100% free” market guy as much as a "very few, clear and simple rules/laws that prevent evil men from trampling the population’. I would just prefer these regulations were more in line with legal rulings and less in line that social constructed conditions.

Company A destroying the environment with waste dumping by a school? Towns Folk have better access to the courts and the courts rule waste needs to be handled different rather than the EPA coming in and dictating the situation… You know what I mean? It just seems like a more representitve government than what we have now, and simipler too.

Would the courts be bogged down? Sure, but then more lawyers would have work. :wink:

Best game of the season. Only a ring could be better, and even without a ring, made for a good year.

100

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

Best game of the season. Only a ring could be better, and even without a ring, made for a good year.[/quote]

Go ahead lol, God knows I’d be doing the same thing if the tables were turned.