Hurt Walmart, or Help The Poor?

[jasonnfree]

This help?

1. At Wal-Mart, Americans spend $36,000,000 every hour of every day.

2. This works out to $20,928 profit every minute! 5.8133333% margin

3. Wal-Mart will sell more from January 1 to St. Patrick's Day (March 17th) than Target sells all year.

4. Wal-Mart is bigger than Home Depot + Kroger + Target + Sears + Costco + K-Mart combined.

5. Wal-Mart employs 1.6 million people and is the largest private employer. And most can't speak English.

6. Wal-Mart is the largest company in the history of the World.

7. Wal-Mart now sells more food than Kroger & Safeway combined, and keep in mind they did this in only 15 years.

8. During this same period, 31 Supermarket chains sought bankruptcy (including Winn-Dixie).

9. Wal-Mart now sells more food than any other store in the world.

10. Wal-Mart has approx 3,900 stores in the USA of which 1,906 are Super Centers; this is 1,000 more than it had 5 years ago.

11. This year, 7.2 billion different purchasing transactions will occur at a Wal-Mart store. (Earth's population is approximately 6.5 billion.)

12. 90% of all Americans live within 15 miles of a Wal-Mart.

PC, walmart is successful, no doubt. And they are successful no doubt at least partly because of their employees. So why can't they pay a living wage?

1. "...walmart is successful, no doubt."

OMG…you are correct!
That’s an event that usually accompanies a parting sea or a stone tablet!!!


2. "So why can't they pay a living wage?"

Ahhh....I knew you couldn't get two in a row right.

They do pay a 'living wage'....Wal-Mart has so determined.

So...now back to your crib.

Walmart has so determined you say, but their employees qualify for food stamps and medicare, so how are they paying a living wage if their employees are subsidized by the taxpayer? That includes you, PC. The heirs of that walmart are worth over a hundred billion so c'mon, it would probably take a couple hundred years or more to spend that amount if they spent a million dollars a day, figuring off the top of my head, and they can't pay enough where employees don't have to go the food stamp routine? And if the employees made more, they'd spend more on necessities, considering even with a pay raise they'd still be at subsistence level. Like spending money on stuff at walmart, not ski trips in switzerland or anything.

 

[Oddball]

In real terms, US minimum wage peaked at $1.68/HR in 1968. In 2013 dollars, we're looking at $10.50/HR.

If we adjust using the SSA's Average Wage Index, the minimum wage should be around $12.50/HR. By the way, the AWI is anchored since real minimum wages have decrease 30% over the last 45 years.

I don't think it should be permissible to pay a subsistence wage of $7.25/HR. It makes wage workers at the very bottom unable to negotiate for wages. This forces people to accept job offers under deplorable conditions in order to survive. I don't even know how we can call ourselves a "free country" under such conditions since low-age workers aren't "free" in the economic sense of the word.

Please explain to me how we can be capitalistic economy when one of the most critical components, labor, is in serfdom to the owners of capital.

Inflation is the fault of the Fed, not employers of entry-level employees.

Taxes, especially FICA and sales taxes (i.e. those that hit those least able to pay them the hardest) are also up markedly since then.

If anyone is kicking the shit out of those on the lowest rungs of the employment ladder, it's gubmint and the Fed.

A little Inflation is perfectly normal, robust economy. It encourages investments and dissuades the hoarding of cash. The problem in the US is that wages of have been stagnant for thirty plus years. Even so, purchasing power has increased significantly over the last hundred years.

My only problem with the FED their attempts to reinflate certain types of assets.

Inflation is a product of the worthless fiat currency of communistic central planners....It eventually saps all of the buying power out of the script of the realm, hitting those at the bottom rungs of the economic ladder the hardest.

Moreover, it's none of your goddamn business who is saving their money (i.e. hoarding cash).....But discouraging saving is another strategy of the communistic monied elite, who seek to keep the peasants in their "proper" place.

Your only problem with the Fed is that you're not in charge of the whole Ponzi scheme.

 

[Kimura]

This help?

1. At Wal-Mart, Americans spend $36,000,000 every hour of every day.

2. This works out to $20,928 profit every minute! 5.8133333% margin

3. Wal-Mart will sell more from January 1 to St. Patrick's Day (March 17th) than Target sells all year.

4. Wal-Mart is bigger than Home Depot + Kroger + Target + Sears + Costco + K-Mart combined.

5. Wal-Mart employs 1.6 million people and is the largest private employer. And most can't speak English.

6. Wal-Mart is the largest company in the history of the World.

7. Wal-Mart now sells more food than Kroger & Safeway combined, and keep in mind they did this in only 15 years.

8. During this same period, 31 Supermarket chains sought bankruptcy (including Winn-Dixie).

9. Wal-Mart now sells more food than any other store in the world.

10. Wal-Mart has approx 3,900 stores in the USA of which 1,906 are Super Centers; this is 1,000 more than it had 5 years ago.

11. This year, 7.2 billion different purchasing transactions will occur at a Wal-Mart store. (Earth's population is approximately 6.5 billion.)

12. 90% of all Americans live within 15 miles of a Wal-Mart.

PC, walmart is successful, no doubt. And they are successful no doubt at least partly because of their employees. So why can't they pay a living wage?

No country on earth has enacted a living wage... No really, they haven't.

As for corporations and businesses, I suppose it would be possible. How would you like to have my salary?

Elaborate.

The US minimum wage is subsistence level. I'd like to see it at 12.50/HR.

I also think the Job Guarantee is great idea. I hate the NAIRU buffer stock. We effectively use unemployment to control inflation. It drives me up a wall.

 

[Kimura]

Inflation is the fault of the Fed, not employers of entry-level employees.

Taxes, especially FICA and sales taxes (i.e. those that hit those least able to pay them the hardest) are also up markedly since then.

If anyone is kicking the shit out of those on the lowest rungs of the employment ladder, it's gubmint and the Fed.

A little Inflation is perfectly normal, robust economy. It encourages investments and dissuades the hoarding of cash. The problem in the US is that wages of have been stagnant for thirty plus years. Even so, purchasing power has increased significantly over the last hundred years.

My only problem with the FED their attempts to reinflate certain types of assets.

Inflation is a product of the worthless fiat currency of communistic central planners....It eventually saps all of the buying power out of the script of the realm, hitting those at the bottom rungs of the economic ladder the hardest.

Moreover, it's none of your goddamn business who is saving their money (i.e. hoarding cash).....But discouraging saving is another strategy of the communistic monied elite, who seek to keep the peasants in their "proper" place.

Your only problem with the Fed is that you're not in charge of the whole Ponzi scheme.

If you think our currency is worthless, I'll gladly take those fiat burdens off your hands. PM me, we can facilitate a wire transfer.

Really, you're going to pull a Peter Schiff? Let me guess: capital comes from savings? Wrong. Savings is a function of investment.

You're lucky I'm not running the show. Medicare for all, Job guarantee as an automatic stabilizer, doubling of social security, lower taxes, elimination of FICA, free university education or vocational training, 6 weeks of vacation per year, 5k per year for medical or given to you as a rebate on your tax return at the end of the year, more nuclear power, R&D, high speed rail, etc.

 

[SteadyMercury]

A little Inflation is perfectly normal in a robust economy. It encourages investments and dissuades the hoarding of cash.

Yup this one of the more puzzling things one encounters on forums like this, the assumption that any inflation is bad for the economy.

 

[AmazonTania]

PC, walmart is successful, no doubt. And they are successful no doubt at least partly because of their employees. So why can't they pay a living wage?

No country on earth has enacted a living wage... No really, they haven't.

As for corporations and businesses, I suppose it would be possible. How would you like to have my salary?

Elaborate.

The US minimum wage is subsistence level. I'd like to see it at 12.50/HR.

The minimum wage is only one subset of labour markets all around the world. It doesn't necessarily reveals the entire story. Most countries have found a living wage ill-contrived, so instead they've adopted minimum monthly wages. Which is basically the same thing as a minimum wage, only it's based on a annualised income.

Of course, you already know that if it were up to me there would be no minimum wage.

What? I never said I was part of the solution...

I also think the Job Guarantee is great idea. I hate the NAIRU buffer stock. We effectively use unemployment to control inflation. It drives me up a wall.

Well unemployment is a product of inflation, not the other way around. As inflation becomes really bad, one of the ways to deal with this is a massive reduction in the work force. We don't need alot of inflation, if that is what you desire. Inflation would be better handled if we as a nation started to produce more.

 

[Kimura]

No country on earth has enacted a living wage... No really, they haven't.

As for corporations and businesses, I suppose it would be possible. How would you like to have my salary?

Elaborate.

The US minimum wage is subsistence level. I'd like to see it at 12.50/HR.

The minimum wage is only one subset of labour markets all around the world. It doesn't necessarily reveals the entire story. Most countries have found a living wage ill-contrived, so instead they've adopted minimum monthly wages. Which is basically the same thing as a minimum wage, only it's based on a annualised income.

Of course, you already know that if it were up to me there would be no minimum wage.

What? I never said I was part of the solution...

I also think the Job Guarantee is great idea. I hate the NAIRU buffer stock. We effectively use unemployment to control inflation. It drives me up a wall.

Well unemployment is a product of inflation, not the other way around. As inflation becomes really bad, one of the ways to deal with this is a massive reduction in the work force. We don't need alot of inflation, if that is what you desire. Inflation would be better handled if we as a nation started to produce more.

Unemployment is a product of our macroeconomic failures. It means the deficit is too small in all actuality. A job guarantee would provide the private sector with a pool of trained labor and increase productivity. We would also know that we need need to spend x amount to employ y amount of the unemployed. Also, it would reduce inflationary pressures hiring for the bottom.

 

[Blooper]

"...a manifestly powerful capitalist class,..."


The imaginary bête noire created to persuade the unintelligent.
Raise your paw.

Is that to say you reject the existence of basic social roles? There's a lot I disagree with when it comes to the Marxists, but Capital's explanation of wages and property was among the best.

From what country are you posting?

Here, in the United States we believe in seeded rolls......not social roles.


See if you can learn about us from this, so that you avoid embarrassment in the future:

"It’s a common misperception that earnings or wealth quintiles are static, closed, private clubs with very little turnover, so that once a household finds itself in an earnings quintile or living below the poverty line in a given year, it’s doomed to stay there for life.

But the empirical evidence tells a much different story of dynamic change and turnover in the U.S. economy—people and households move up and down the earnings and wealth quintiles throughout their careers and lives.

Many of today’s poor are tomorrow’s rich, and many of today’s rich are tomorrow’s middle class, reflecting the significant upward and downward mobility in the U.S. economy."
OneLife: Income Mobility in the Dynamic U.S. Economy



Do come visit the free world in the future.

I'm posting from the United States. Though your remark about the lack of freedom in my dear country wasn't wasted.

Also, when I talk about social class, I use the very basic Marxian definition: a group within a society that preforms a specific function. Income mobility will make these classes less divergent interests, but won't abolish them. Which begs the question, why hasn't this happened?

It, in large part, is due to not only a large degree of stagnation, but also political and economic inequality.

Changes in the economy mean that, no matter how hard people work or how much they invest in education, they may still find themselves barely treading water. Even before the financial crisis, there weren’t enough good jobs to go around – thanks to globalization, automation, declining unionization, and lax labor standards. The majority of new jobs created during the presidencies of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush were low-wage positions with no benefits. These trends – not, say, a lack of ambition – help explain why half of all American households bring in under $50,000 and have no assets.

“Success for everybody” is simply not possible against this backdrop of structural inequality. Ironically, conservatives like Cantor are placing ever more faith in the great American virtues of hard work and self-improvement even as these virtues deliver less and less mobility.

Once upon a time, for example, Americans with a strong work ethic but little education could move upward thanks to unionized manufacturing jobs. But as both manufacturing jobs and unions started to disappear in the 1970s, earnings of high school-only males fell off a cliff: declining by 15 between 1973 and 1989. Today, about a third of poor families with children include a parent who is working full-time.

The income mobility myth | The Great Debate

THE financial crisis and its aftermath have taken a significant toll on American households, but many of the country's economic problems predate the crisis. New data on income and poverty released by the Census Bureau reveal a picture of sustained stagnation in incomes for most American households. From the richest to the poorest, inflation-adjusted incomes were lower in 2010 than they were a decade ago. Stagnation is a relatively new phenomenon for the rich, but not for the rest. In 2010, the typical American household earned an inflation-adjusted income of $49,445, scarcely different from that in 1989 and a fall of 2.3% since 2009. Current incomes are at roughly the level of the late 1970s for those near the bottom of the income spectrum. Of course, many of today's consumer products are of higher quality today than they were in the 1970s, and the typical household has access now to things like iPods and flatscreen televisions that didn't exist then. On the other hand, the cost of everything from housing to education has risen steadily in recent decades. From a real income perspective, the American economy has already experienced a lost decade, but for the median household the picture is one of a generation of stagnation.

US household income: Cutting the cake | The Economist

The government, as it stands now, is acting starkly in the interests of a single strata. We have different penalties for corporations and individuals. A tax code made to cater to large business, which combined with taxpayer subsidies, undermines small businesses (notably cooperatives) and serves as government enforcement of exploitation. We have politicians (Repubs and Dems) pushing for privatization, cutting social services the poor and working classes rely on, and seeking to remove what were meant to be democratic controls on an alienated private sector. Corporations are shipping jobs overseas, which, in and of itself, shows a massive class distinction.

Anyone who believes we live in a society with income mobility, no social classes, and so on, is just blocking out reality.

 

[AmazonTania]

A little Inflation is perfectly normal in a robust economy. It encourages investments and dissuades the hoarding of cash.

Yup this one of the more puzzling things one encounters on forums like this, the assumption that any inflation is bad for the economy.

That really depends, but you are wrong. Back then, inflation averaged Y/Y around the 1% range. Today, we have 2%, 2.5% and 3% (on occasion) inflation and this is considered too low. I generally believe that inflation is actually higher, but for the sake of this point, for one moment let's say that I believed the CPI. Aside from the inflation target set by the fed, what exactly is 'too much.'

The cost of living is increasing. Although, people are spending more, but it's not because consumers have more money to spend. The items they are purchasing just cost more.

 

[Oddball]

A little Inflation is perfectly normal in a robust economy. It encourages investments and dissuades the hoarding of cash.

Yup this one of the more puzzling things one encounters on forums like this, the assumption that any inflation is bad for the economy.

Inflation devalues the currency and saps its buying power.

How is that beneficial to anyone who doesn't have access to the money first (i.e. the commercial banksters)?

 

[AmazonTania]

Elaborate.

The US minimum wage is subsistence level. I'd like to see it at 12.50/HR.

The minimum wage is only one subset of labour markets all around the world. It doesn't necessarily reveals the entire story. Most countries have found a living wage ill-contrived, so instead they've adopted minimum monthly wages. Which is basically the same thing as a minimum wage, only it's based on a annualised income.

Of course, you already know that if it were up to me there would be no minimum wage.

What? I never said I was part of the solution...

I also think the Job Guarantee is great idea. I hate the NAIRU buffer stock. We effectively use unemployment to control inflation. It drives me up a wall.

Well unemployment is a product of inflation, not the other way around. As inflation becomes really bad, one of the ways to deal with this is a massive reduction in the work force. We don't need alot of inflation, if that is what you desire. Inflation would be better handled if we as a nation started to produce more.

Unemployment is a product of our macroeconomic failures. It means the deficit is too small in all actuality. A job guarantee would provide the private sector with a pool of trained labor and increase productivity. We would also know that we need need to spend x amount to employ y amount of the unemployed. Also, it would reduce inflationary pressures hiring for the bottom.

The deficits were rather large in retrospect, but I generally agree with the ends of a Job Guarantee. I just disagree with the means. Aside from the government spending usually spending false signals in the market place. But the Government spending has resulted in some job creation. They all suck, but it's something...

A better way to curb wage demands and price stability would be eliminating the minimum wage instead.

 

[AmazonTania]

A little Inflation is perfectly normal in a robust economy. It encourages investments and dissuades the hoarding of cash.

Yup this one of the more puzzling things one encounters on forums like this, the assumption that any inflation is bad for the economy.

Inflation devalues the currency and saps its buying power.

How is that beneficial to anyone who doesn't have access to the money first (i.e. the commercial banksters)?

Even under a Gold Standard there was inflation, but inflation was very small. Even still, inflation is NOT totally bad when it's small.

Although, the same people who generally believe that inflation is NOT totally bad will scoff at the idea of deflation. That's where the inconsistencies come in.

 

[Kimura]

Yup this one of the more puzzling things one encounters on forums like this, the assumption that any inflation is bad for the economy.

Inflation devalues the currency and saps its buying power.

How is that beneficial to anyone who doesn't have access to the money first (i.e. the commercial banksters)?

Even under a Gold Standard there was inflation, but inflation was very small. Even still, inflation is NOT totally bad when it's small.

Although, the same people who generally believe that inflation is NOT totally bad will scoff at the idea of deflation. That's where the inconsistencies come in.

Deflation is equally as problematic. Especially given the domino effect it can have on the macroeconomic enchilada.

The beauty of fiat currency is that we can control both inflation and deflation without worrying about trivial externalities.

By the way, just to clear things up, I'm a Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) proponent. People call me a Keynesian, etc. I'm a Chartalist for lack of a better term.

As a bond trader, functional finance finally clicked. The US turns over tens of trillions in bonds every year. Year in and year out like clockwork.

I did my MS in economics based on the work of GF Knapp and Abba Lerner. That's when I had my Eureka moment so to speak.

 

[AmazonTania]

Inflation devalues the currency and saps its buying power.

How is that beneficial to anyone who doesn't have access to the money first (i.e. the commercial banksters)?

Even under a Gold Standard there was inflation, but inflation was very small. Even still, inflation is NOT totally bad when it's small.

Although, the same people who generally believe that inflation is NOT totally bad will scoff at the idea of deflation. That's where the inconsistencies come in.

Deflation is equally as problematic. Especially given the domino effect it can have an the macroeconomic enchilada.

I believe deflation is good. It's better when it's necessary, such as during a recession when prices need to fall. Most people would point out Japan as an example of bad deflation. Outside of a somewhat stagnant GDP, a flat Nikkei average and an economy totally dependent upon exports, I haven't really seen to many indicators of an economy which was 'suffering.' In fact, I remember reading a survey conducted by the Bank of Japan and a vast majority of respondents were very happy when prices fell. Contrary, when they started to notice that prices increase, 'they didn't like it.'

Then again, what do they know. After I eat my dinner I'll try to find the survey and post it here.

The beauty of fiat currency is that we can control both inflation and deflation without worrying about trivial externalities.

The trivial externality you had to concern yourself with under a Gold Standard was a chunk of shinny metal. The externalities you have to face with a fiat standard are flesh and blood human beings.

There are plenty of anecdotal evidence of inflation, but according to Helicopter Ben and the CPI, this is all in our heads. Then again, what do we know...

By the way, just to clear things up, I'm a Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) proponent. People call me a Keynesian, etc. I'm a Chartalist for lack of a better term.

I'd figured you'd have to be a Chartalist if you weren't a Keynesian. But there is nothing wrong with a Keynesian. We're all Keynesian now.

Well, except for me. There are at least 5 different economic schools of thought I subscribe to. But no, according to progressives if you aren't progressive and Keynesian, than you are obviously far-right and you must be a Con.

As a bond trader, functional finance finally clicked. The US turns over tens of trillions in bonds every year. Year in and year out like clockwork.

I did my MS in economics based on the work of GF Knapp and Abba Lerner. That's when I had my Eureka moment so to speak.

Yeah, I don't think the US has ever paid a bill since the 1920's. It just sells one bond for another.

Trading Currencies is when my 'Eureka' moment happened. It really didn't happen until I started getting involved with commodities. I don't manage Options or Futures accounts. You never know where the market will take you.

 

[Kimura]

Even under a Gold Standard there was inflation, but inflation was very small. Even still, inflation is NOT totally bad when it's small.

Although, the same people who generally believe that inflation is NOT totally bad will scoff at the idea of deflation. That's where the inconsistencies come in.

Deflation is equally as problematic. Especially given the domino effect it can have an the macroeconomic enchilada.

I believe deflation is good. It's better when it's necessary, such as during a recession when prices need to fall. Most people would point out Japan as an example of bad deflation. Outside of a somewhat stagnant GDP, a flat Nikkei average and an economy totally dependent upon exports, I haven't really seen to many indicators of an economy which was 'suffering.' In fact, I remember reading a survey conducted by the Bank of Japan and a vast majority of respondents were very happy when prices fell. Contrary, when they started to notice that prices increase, 'they didn't like it.'

Then again, what do they know. After I eat my dinner I'll try to find the survey and post it here.



The trivial externality you had to concern yourself with under a Gold Standard was a chunk of shinny metal. The externalities you have to face with a fiat standard are flesh and blood human beings.

There are plenty of anecdotal evidence of inflation, but according to Helicopter Ben and the CPI, this is all in our heads. Then again, what do we know...

By the way, just to clear things up, I'm a Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) proponent. People call me a Keynesian, etc. I'm a Chartalist for lack of a better term.

I'd figured you'd have to be a Chartalist if you weren't a Keynesian. But there is nothing wrong with a Keynesian. We're all Keynesian now.

Well, except for me. There are at least 5 different economic schools of thought I subscribe to. But no, according to progressives if you aren't progressive and Keynesian, than you are obviously far-right and you must be a Con.

As a bond trader, functional finance finally clicked. The US turns over tens of trillions in bonds every year. Year in and year out like clockwork.

I did my MS in economics based on the work of GF Knapp and Abba Lerner. That's when I had my Eureka moment so to speak.

Yeah, I don't think the US has ever paid a bill since the 1920's. It just sells one bond for another.

Trading Currencies is when my 'Eureka' moment happened. It really didn't happen until I started getting involved with commodities. I don't manage Options or Futures accounts. You never know where the market will take you.

Are you supply-side or demand-side?
Your posts make me think you're fence sitting. Seriously.

The inflation metrics. Inflation is an increase in the general price. You can't claim inflation on asset classes or sectors of the economy. That's not inflation.

 

[Oddball]

Yup this one of the more puzzling things one encounters on forums like this, the assumption that any inflation is bad for the economy.

Inflation devalues the currency and saps its buying power.

How is that beneficial to anyone who doesn't have access to the money first (i.e. the commercial banksters)?

Even under a Gold Standard there was inflation, but inflation was very small. Even still, inflation is NOT totally bad when it's small.

Although, the same people who generally believe that inflation is NOT totally bad will scoff at the idea of deflation. That's where the inconsistencies come in.

That inflation doesn't benefit those in control of issuing the commercial fiat script, who then turn around and charge interest on their money-from-thin-air....That inflation comes from introducing more specie into the system, which is almost always counterbalanced by increased private sector industrial output (i.e. wealth creation).

The inflation from fiat banksters like the Fed enriches the issuers and those who get their hands on the script first, to the detriment of the buying power of those who get it further downstream.....It's the deflation of that worthless paper currency which destroys nations and lives.

 

[Rshermr]

Damn. What a profound post. Jesus.

 

[Kimura]

Inflation devalues the currency and saps its buying power.

How is that beneficial to anyone who doesn't have access to the money first (i.e. the commercial banksters)?

Even under a Gold Standard there was inflation, but inflation was very small. Even still, inflation is NOT totally bad when it's small.

Although, the same people who generally believe that inflation is NOT totally bad will scoff at the idea of deflation. That's where the inconsistencies come in.

That inflation doesn't benefit those in control of issuing the commercial fiat script, who then turn around and charge interest on their money-from-thin-air....That inflation comes from introducing more specie into the system, which is almost always counterbalanced by increased private sector industrial output (i.e. wealth creation).

The inflation from fiat banksters like the Fed enriches the issuers and those who get their hands on the script first, to the detriment of the buying power of those who get it further downstream.....It's the deflation of that worthless paper currency which destroys nations and lives.

Do you have names? Who are the nebulous "they"?

Btw, do you even speak to Art Vandelay? Just curious.

 

[mudwhistle]

2. The phenomenon of "child labor" has been alleviated, throughout economic history, through improved standards of living....capitalism.
As a family's income increases, they no longer allow their children to work.

HA! That's a good one, it's laws that have stopped child labor, and it still occurs in other nations that Wal Mart buys its products from.

Price Cutter buys their products from the same countries.

STFU.

 

[AmazonTania]

2. The phenomenon of "child labor" has been alleviated, throughout economic history, through improved standards of living....capitalism.
As a family's income increases, they no longer allow their children to work.

HA! That's a good one, it's laws that have stopped child labor, and it still occurs in other nations that Wal Mart buys its products from.

What exactly are the alternatives? Prostitution? Crime? Drugs? Human Trafficking?

I'd rather have sweatshops any day.