DC's Minimum Wage Really Does Cost Jobs At Walmart

[Conservative65]

Again, you'd have to ask the people who gave her the money. Unless she stole it, someone must have though she was worth it.

I asked you the question. You seem to feel workers at Walmart aren't worth being payed even a liveable wage. So, is she worth it?

What does it matter to you and how is it relevant?

You folks don't feel Walmart Workers are 'worth' much. So how much do you feel Alice Walton is worth? Is she really worth her several $Billions?

The work they do is not worth more than MW. How is that the same as saying they're not worth much? As for Alice Walton, why does she have to justify what she has to anyone?

You should check out Alice Walton's bloody sordid history. It might just change your perspective on determining what a human being is 'worth.'

Since we're talking monetarily, she's worth about $8 billion.

 

[hadit]

Greedy white Republican dude code for: '**** em, they should just shut up and be happy slaves.'

They should be honorable enough to know that if they offer a set of skills and are getting paid at an equivalent level for those skills to STFU or improve them. What you demand is they be paid at a wage above what they offer in return. You say whatever it is isn't enough but you don't what skills they offer in return for the higher wage.

Yes we know, Walmart Workers are unwashed untouchables. They aren't worthy of being treated like human beings. They should just shut up and be happy little slaves. God, you greedy bastids sure are warped.

Oh, heck no. They should be very UNhappy and take whatever steps they need to take in order to qualify for better paying jobs. Only a liberal would think that a worker can only work at one job for ever.

Yup, they're worthless untouchables. They should actually be happy they have a job, and should even consider doing it for free. I mean, Alice Walton does need another yacht.

Y'all greedy bastids is craaazy.

No, those of you who incorrectly define greedy are crazy. You demand someone get more than the job they do is worth and have yet to justify based on what pay is determined why they should. Your entire argument is centered around a bleeding heart mentality rather than along the lines for which the pay should be determined.

You tell me. What should someone whose only skill set allows them to do is sweep floor, empty trash, and clean toilets make per hour? You're wanting to pay them for that low skill set what most people learn to do by the time they are 8 years old. If that's all they can do as an adult, the problem is with them not with someone paying them whatever amount is determined those skills are worth.

And if companies are forced to pay high wages for emptying trash cans and sweeping floors, guess what jobs are going to be eliminated? Executive secretaries can carry a trash can to an incinerator chute every day themselves, and floor sweeping can be automated.

 

[paulitician]

No thanks to you people. If it were left up to you folks, they'd be making $1/hr. But that being said, even $10.50 is peanuts in today's America.

I'm a firm believer that you get paid what the skills you offer in return or worth regardless of the amount.

If it was up to bleeding hearts like you, people would be paid what they told the employer to pay them based on their situation even if that situation existed prior to being employed somewhere and due to things they did out of the control of the employer. You have it backwards. The employer, the one whose money is doing the paying, gets to decide not the one doing the work.

If someone doesn't like whatever wage it is they make, improve their skills instead of begging for more. If they spent half the time doing the former, they wouldn't have to do the latter. It would take care of itself.

Greedy white Republican dude code for: '**** em, they should just shut up and be happy slaves.'

They should be honorable enough to know that if they offer a set of skills and are getting paid at an equivalent level for those skills to STFU or improve them. What you demand is they be paid at a wage above what they offer in return. You say whatever it is isn't enough but you don't what skills they offer in return for the higher wage.

Yes we know, Walmart Workers are unwashed untouchables. They aren't worthy of being treated like human beings. They should just shut up and be happy little slaves. God, you greedy bastids sure are warped.

If they offer skills worth a certain amount and are paid that amount, how is that not treating them like human beings? It's equal. You mean you don't support equal?

How much work is Alice Walton doing? Unless you consider driving drunk and killing people, 'work.' What skills does she have that warrant her several $Billions?

 

[paulitician]

I asked you the question. You seem to feel workers at Walmart aren't worth being payed even a liveable wage. So, is she worth it?

What does it matter to you and how is it relevant?

You folks don't feel Walmart Workers are 'worth' much. So how much do you feel Alice Walton is worth? Is she really worth her several $Billions?

The work they do is not worth more than MW. How is that the same as saying they're not worth much? As for Alice Walton, why does she have to justify what she has to anyone?

You should check out Alice Walton's bloody sordid history. It might just change your perspective on determining what a human being is 'worth.'

Since we're talking monetarily, she's worth about $8 billion.

But is she 'worth' $8 billion?

 

[Andylusion]

I think those lowly paid Walmart workers would have a lot more value to Walmart IF they all decided to just live the good life on welfare and SNAP (like most of you rightwingers think they do) and not show up for work for a while.

All that merchandise and food not being put out to sell. that would be a problem.

Anyway, Walmarts HR dept is looking to hire the lowest skilled workers they can find. It is not in Walmarts best interest to have a smarter, more motivated workforce.

they (smarter, more motivated) wont stay for those wages if they have anything on the ball. And turnover is as hard on Walmart as any other company.

So you end up with a large workforce making minimum wage in a job that is probably all they can do.

Walmart has recently increased the hourly earnings for a great many employees.

Out of the kindness of their hearts you think?

Or did they do that because of pubic disapproval of the way they were instructing their employees on how to get SNAP? Well, that and the public was wondering why a company making billions in profit couldnt pay a LITTLE bit more to their hourly workers.

Either way it was good for the employees. Which is actually good for Walmart.

Must really make you Republicans on here who think these workers are only worth 5 bucks an hour, it must make you wonder why Walmart would raise wages. It was like a betrayal to you rabid wage cutters.

And when you shop at Walmart, your bill might be more. You know Walmarts gonna pass those wage increases on to you.

the employees get a discount. LMAO....

No, you are nutz. First off, if people don't show up for work, they simply don't get paid.

Second, your value as an employee goes DOWN when you don't show up for work. I'm certainly not going to pay you more.

Third, if I have to pay more money for wages, that means I have to charge more money to the customers. The Customer base for walmart is entirely the discount low-price market. The moment those customers have to pay more, they'll go somewhere else.

When the store doesn't have customers, then those employees are unemployed.

You people live in a myth. "If we just made them pay more....." Not going to happen.

As for Walmarts claim to raise pay, that was more a PR move to shut you people up, than it was reality. Most of the pay increases were for people who were going to get them anyone. The company intentionally held back pay raises, to build up a large number, so they could give them all at once, and make you think your tiny insignificant whine fest, had an effect.

I knew a girl who worked there for years, and she was already being paid $10/hr back in 2005. Why? Because she had been there a long time, and had an excellent work record. Walmart has always paid a premium for quality employees, and routinely paid more than the crappy ones.

The problem is you guys either find some guy that's been there a whooping 3 months, or has a long history of showing up late, or leaving early, or taking 5 smoke breaks a day... and they whine and moan they are only paid $8/hr.... well duh... they are either noobs, or they suck.

You show me the guy that's been there 5 years, never been late, always happy, does whatever it takes, and works his butt off, and get's along with everyone, and is only making minimum wage.

Show me that guy. One example... just one. Prove it.

 

[Wilbur Right]

Any bets Walmart raised their pay scale to keep the union out?

 

[Conservative65]

he Liberal side thinks those with a lot of money owe more to someone that the skills they provide and the revenue t

You might want to try and use Google somethime.

In April of this year, the StARtING wage at Walmart will be 9 bucks an hour. Avg wages almost 13 bucks an hour.

Quit ******* ragging on Walmart employees.

Or at least threaten to sell that huge block of Walmart stock you have in protest for them (Walmart) paying such high wages.
Cause you guys know that those workers are only worth 7.50 an hour max. LMAO.

The Walmart workers are worth whatever WALMART decides they are worth. When I use a dollar amount, I'm not saying Walmart should pay them that amount, it's a number showing that whatever Walmart thinks is the only thing that matters. If Walmart thinks they're worth $9/hr, then they're worth $9/hr. If Walmart think they're worth $5/hr, that's what they are worth? In the end, it's what Walmart not your, mine, or the government's business.

 

[Conservative65]

What does it matter to you and how is it relevant?

You folks don't feel Walmart Workers are 'worth' much. So how much do you feel Alice Walton is worth? Is she really worth her several $Billions?

The work they do is not worth more than MW. How is that the same as saying they're not worth much? As for Alice Walton, why does she have to justify what she has to anyone?

You should check out Alice Walton's bloody sordid history. It might just change your perspective on determining what a human being is 'worth.'

Since we're talking monetarily, she's worth about $8 billion.

But is she 'worth' $8 billion?

I don't her. Again, this is about monetary concepts so whatever her accountants say she's worth monetarily is what she's worth.

I don't you or what you're worth monetarily. I don't care either. Since you think it's your place to determine what a company should pay and it isn't your money doing the paying, I'd say you're "worth" less than zero.

 

[hadit]

What does it matter to you and how is it relevant?

You folks don't feel Walmart Workers are 'worth' much. So how much do you feel Alice Walton is worth? Is she really worth her several $Billions?

The work they do is not worth more than MW. How is that the same as saying they're not worth much? As for Alice Walton, why does she have to justify what she has to anyone?

You should check out Alice Walton's bloody sordid history. It might just change your perspective on determining what a human being is 'worth.'

Since we're talking monetarily, she's worth about $8 billion.

But is she 'worth' $8 billion?

Her worth as a person is completely independent of her financial status, which is true of every person. If she was an employee, her work could be assigned a fiscal value. The same is true of Walmart employees.

 

[Conservative65]

I'm a firm believer that you get paid what the skills you offer in return or worth regardless of the amount.

If it was up to bleeding hearts like you, people would be paid what they told the employer to pay them based on their situation even if that situation existed prior to being employed somewhere and due to things they did out of the control of the employer. You have it backwards. The employer, the one whose money is doing the paying, gets to decide not the one doing the work.

If someone doesn't like whatever wage it is they make, improve their skills instead of begging for more. If they spent half the time doing the former, they wouldn't have to do the latter. It would take care of itself.

Greedy white Republican dude code for: '**** em, they should just shut up and be happy slaves.'

They should be honorable enough to know that if they offer a set of skills and are getting paid at an equivalent level for those skills to STFU or improve them. What you demand is they be paid at a wage above what they offer in return. You say whatever it is isn't enough but you don't what skills they offer in return for the higher wage.

Yes we know, Walmart Workers are unwashed untouchables. They aren't worthy of being treated like human beings. They should just shut up and be happy little slaves. God, you greedy bastids sure are warped.

If they offer skills worth a certain amount and are paid that amount, how is that not treating them like human beings? It's equal. You mean you don't support equal?

How much work is Alice Walton doing? Unless you consider driving drunk and killing people, 'work.' What skills does she have that warrant her several $Billions?

Apparently enough to be worth $8 billion. She's worth that much financially so I'd say whatever she did to make it had to have some skills.

 

[Andylusion]

So not show up to work because you don't like receiving a wage you agreed to when you took the job

Hell yea. It called a workers strike. We have a histroy of them in this country.
It catches the attention of the employer.

At will employement means you can leave when you want. What? Did you think you signed an employment contract when you went to work at Walmart for 8 bucks an hour.

What were you? A serf?

But dont worry. If Walmart ever does unionize, the Walton family will be just fine.

And the employees would be better off too.

You I dont know about. I guess your favorite store might have to raise prices on you and others who shop there.

Cant have the billioniare family taking a hit now could you?

Dude.... The butchers of Walmart only considered the idea of striking, and they fired ALL OF THEM.


Yeah go for a strike. See what happens. Good luck with that.

And when you actually are making minimum wage, with zero benefits at Mom&Pop shop... You'll be BEGGING for your Walmart job back.

And trust me.... The billionaires at Walmart are not going to "take a hit" from you people. The entire Walton famliy could buy entire Island chains in Asia, and spend the rest of their entire lives, being served martinis by Bikini clad servant girls FOR THE REST OF THEIR ENTIRE FREAKING LIFE..... and you think you are going to make them "take a hit"????


Cool hooch bro.... might want to moderate a bit... you are speaking crazy.

 

[Conservative65]

You folks don't feel Walmart Workers are 'worth' much. So how much do you feel Alice Walton is worth? Is she really worth her several $Billions?

The work they do is not worth more than MW. How is that the same as saying they're not worth much? As for Alice Walton, why does she have to justify what she has to anyone?

You should check out Alice Walton's bloody sordid history. It might just change your perspective on determining what a human being is 'worth.'

Since we're talking monetarily, she's worth about $8 billion.

But is she 'worth' $8 billion?

Her worth as a person is completely independent of her financial status, which is true of every person. If she was an employee, her work could be assigned a fiscal value. The same is true of Walmart employees.

Paul's problem is he thinks it's his place to determine monetary worth of skills when it comes to paying someone with money that isn't his.

 

[Conservative65]

So not show up to work because you don't like receiving a wage you agreed to when you took the job

Hell yea. It called a workers strike. We have a histroy of them in this country.
It catches the attention of the employer.

At will employement means you can leave when you want. What? Did you think you signed an employment contract when you went to work at Walmart for 8 bucks an hour.

What were you? A serf?

But dont worry. If Walmart ever does unionize, the Walton family will be just fine.

And the employees would be better off too.

You I dont know about. I guess your favorite store might have to raise prices on you and others who shop there.

Cant have the billioniare family taking a hit now could you?

Dude.... The butchers of Walmart only considered the idea of striking, and they fired ALL OF THEM.


Yeah go for a strike. See what happens. Good luck with that.

And when you actually are making minimum wage, with zero benefits at Mom&Pop shop... You'll be BEGGING for your Walmart job back.

And trust me.... The billionaires at Walmart are not going to "take a hit" from you people. The entire Walton famliy could buy entire Island chains in Asia, and spend the rest of their entire lives, being served martinis by Bikini clad servant girls FOR THE REST OF THEIR ENTIRE FREAKING LIFE..... and you think you are going to make them "take a hit"????


Cool hooch bro.... might want to moderate a bit... you are speaking crazy.

In my State, you may as well hold up a sign that says I quit if you consider going on strike.

 

[hadit]

So not show up to work because you don't like receiving a wage you agreed to when you took the job

Hell yea. It called a workers strike. We have a histroy of them in this country.
It catches the attention of the employer.

At will employement means you can leave when you want. What? Did you think you signed an employment contract when you went to work at Walmart for 8 bucks an hour.

What were you? A serf?

But dont worry. If Walmart ever does unionize, the Walton family will be just fine.

And the employees would be better off too.

You I dont know about. I guess your favorite store might have to raise prices on you and others who shop there.

Cant have the billioniare family taking a hit now could you?

Dude.... The butchers of Walmart only considered the idea of striking, and they fired ALL OF THEM.


Yeah go for a strike. See what happens. Good luck with that.

And when you actually are making minimum wage, with zero benefits at Mom&Pop shop... You'll be BEGGING for your Walmart job back.

And trust me.... The billionaires at Walmart are not going to "take a hit" from you people. The entire Walton famliy could buy entire Island chains in Asia, and spend the rest of their entire lives, being served martinis by Bikini clad servant girls FOR THE REST OF THEIR ENTIRE FREAKING LIFE..... and you think you are going to make them "take a hit"????


Cool hooch bro.... might want to moderate a bit... you are speaking crazy.

Good business people don't become and stay wealthy by being stupid. Walmart is not going to suddenly start paying a lot of employees a lot more with no changes at all, which is apparently what the rainbow farting unicorn crowd thinks will happen if they just scream loud enough. If you increase labor costs by, for example, 50%, you're going to have to cut costs somewhere or increase revenue. That means higher prices, layoffs, store closings, stalled growth, or most likely some combination thereof.

 

[Indeependent]

Sounds to me as if they dealt with it and won.

Indeed.
I think the problem with this Thread is the confusion between Walmart in specific and the general concession that Tax Payers, via political deals, have to subsidize non-skilled labor.

If someone is unskilled, why is it the responsibility of others to offset the results, many times the fault of the person with low skills?

For example, if someone quits high school while a freshman, in essence having only an 8th grade education, why should those of us who finished and went well beyond that be accountable to take care of them? Why is it our place to pay for their bad choices?

Which results in?
Somewhere along the line, the shit's gonna hit the fan.

If you can't provide an explanation or answer my questions, tells me we shouldn't be forced to do it.

I've had similar questions like yours asked of me. Not the same wording but the same context. My response to them was let those who think one group should fund another group's bad choices voluntarily do it. If someone quits high school, to use my example, and now can't make it financially, let the bleeding hearts who think they deserve help prove it by paying their bills for them.

It's not my responsibility to pay for someone else's bad choices.

The liberal response is always that they won't help unless everyone is forced to do it. Apparently they believe that everyone else thinks the same way they do and won't ever voluntarily do anything for anyone.

And the Conservative response?

 

[hadit]

Indeed.
I think the problem with this Thread is the confusion between Walmart in specific and the general concession that Tax Payers, via political deals, have to subsidize non-skilled labor.

If someone is unskilled, why is it the responsibility of others to offset the results, many times the fault of the person with low skills?

For example, if someone quits high school while a freshman, in essence having only an 8th grade education, why should those of us who finished and went well beyond that be accountable to take care of them? Why is it our place to pay for their bad choices?

Which results in?
Somewhere along the line, the shit's gonna hit the fan.

If you can't provide an explanation or answer my questions, tells me we shouldn't be forced to do it.

I've had similar questions like yours asked of me. Not the same wording but the same context. My response to them was let those who think one group should fund another group's bad choices voluntarily do it. If someone quits high school, to use my example, and now can't make it financially, let the bleeding hearts who think they deserve help prove it by paying their bills for them.

It's not my responsibility to pay for someone else's bad choices.

The liberal response is always that they won't help unless everyone is forced to do it. Apparently they believe that everyone else thinks the same way they do and won't ever voluntarily do anything for anyone.

And the Conservative response?

As shown by them being more generous with their own wealth than liberals, to help others on their own.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Greedy white Republican dude code for: '**** em, they should just shut up and be happy slaves.'

They should be honorable enough to know that if they offer a set of skills and are getting paid at an equivalent level for those skills to STFU or improve them. What you demand is they be paid at a wage above what they offer in return. You say whatever it is isn't enough but you don't what skills they offer in return for the higher wage.

Yes we know, Walmart Workers are unwashed untouchables. They aren't worthy of being treated like human beings. They should just shut up and be happy little slaves. God, you greedy bastids sure are warped.

Oh, heck no. They should be very UNhappy and take whatever steps they need to take in order to qualify for better paying jobs. Only a liberal would think that a worker can only work at one job for ever.

Yup, they're worthless untouchables. They should actually be happy they have a job, and should even consider doing it for free. I mean, Alice Walton does need another yacht.

Y'all greedy bastids is craaazy.

You seem incapable of logical thought and actually believe that workers are under no obligation to provide value to their employers. That's a very warped way of thinking, if you can call it that. Actually, come to think of it, it's NOT thinking, it's feeling. You FEEL that every worker should get paid a high wage regardless of the work they do. Feelings are always overwhelmed by reality. Companies simply can't pay workers more than worth of the work they do.

You FEEL that every worker should get paid a high wage regardless of the work they do.

As the fry cook at his local McDonalds, paul thinks he deserves $30 an hour.
He gets paid less because Ronald lives in a big house. And because paul is black. It's very sad.

 

[Conservative65]

Indeed.
I think the problem with this Thread is the confusion between Walmart in specific and the general concession that Tax Payers, via political deals, have to subsidize non-skilled labor.

If someone is unskilled, why is it the responsibility of others to offset the results, many times the fault of the person with low skills?

For example, if someone quits high school while a freshman, in essence having only an 8th grade education, why should those of us who finished and went well beyond that be accountable to take care of them? Why is it our place to pay for their bad choices?

Which results in?
Somewhere along the line, the shit's gonna hit the fan.

If you can't provide an explanation or answer my questions, tells me we shouldn't be forced to do it.

I've had similar questions like yours asked of me. Not the same wording but the same context. My response to them was let those who think one group should fund another group's bad choices voluntarily do it. If someone quits high school, to use my example, and now can't make it financially, let the bleeding hearts who think they deserve help prove it by paying their bills for them.

It's not my responsibility to pay for someone else's bad choices.

The liberal response is always that they won't help unless everyone is forced to do it. Apparently they believe that everyone else thinks the same way they do and won't ever voluntarily do anything for anyone.

And the Conservative response?

I, a Conservative, can only speak for myself. My response is and has been that if some bleeding heart Liberal thinks one person is owed another person's money, write a check. BHL's won't do that. They go about getting the government to force others to adhere to their views on the issue then claim they helped because they did so.

Also, as a Conservative, if I see a need that needs to be met, I meet it and do so privately not caring whether anyone else knows. If others feel a need to join in, fine. If they don't, the last thing I'll do is go about getting the government to force it from them because I think it should be done. Just because I have a good idea doesn't mean I believe others should be forced to participate in it.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I'm a firm believer that you get paid what the skills you offer in return or worth regardless of the amount.

If it was up to bleeding hearts like you, people would be paid what they told the employer to pay them based on their situation even if that situation existed prior to being employed somewhere and due to things they did out of the control of the employer. You have it backwards. The employer, the one whose money is doing the paying, gets to decide not the one doing the work.

If someone doesn't like whatever wage it is they make, improve their skills instead of begging for more. If they spent half the time doing the former, they wouldn't have to do the latter. It would take care of itself.

Greedy white Republican dude code for: '**** em, they should just shut up and be happy slaves.'

They should be honorable enough to know that if they offer a set of skills and are getting paid at an equivalent level for those skills to STFU or improve them. What you demand is they be paid at a wage above what they offer in return. You say whatever it is isn't enough but you don't what skills they offer in return for the higher wage.

Yes we know, Walmart Workers are unwashed untouchables. They aren't worthy of being treated like human beings. They should just shut up and be happy little slaves. God, you greedy bastids sure are warped.

If they offer skills worth a certain amount and are paid that amount, how is that not treating them like human beings? It's equal. You mean you don't support equal?

How much work is Alice Walton doing? Unless you consider driving drunk and killing people, 'work.' What skills does she have that warrant her several $Billions?

How much work is Alice Walton doing?

Why does she have to work? She has billions in stock.

 

[Conservative65]

They should be honorable enough to know that if they offer a set of skills and are getting paid at an equivalent level for those skills to STFU or improve them. What you demand is they be paid at a wage above what they offer in return. You say whatever it is isn't enough but you don't what skills they offer in return for the higher wage.

Yes we know, Walmart Workers are unwashed untouchables. They aren't worthy of being treated like human beings. They should just shut up and be happy little slaves. God, you greedy bastids sure are warped.

Oh, heck no. They should be very UNhappy and take whatever steps they need to take in order to qualify for better paying jobs. Only a liberal would think that a worker can only work at one job for ever.

Yup, they're worthless untouchables. They should actually be happy they have a job, and should even consider doing it for free. I mean, Alice Walton does need another yacht.

Y'all greedy bastids is craaazy.

You seem incapable of logical thought and actually believe that workers are under no obligation to provide value to their employers. That's a very warped way of thinking, if you can call it that. Actually, come to think of it, it's NOT thinking, it's feeling. You FEEL that every worker should get paid a high wage regardless of the work they do. Feelings are always overwhelmed by reality. Companies simply can't pay workers more than worth of the work they do.

You FEEL that every worker should get paid a high wage regardless of the work they do.

As the fry cook at his local McDonalds, paul thinks he deserves $30 an hour.
He gets paid less because Ronald lives in a big house. And because paul is black. It's very sad.

The mindset of bleeding hearts is based on feelings not logic. The problem is they feel it's their place to say what someone else should do with their own money.

I asked Paul to put a value on specific jobs. All you get is living wage as an answer.