Hey cons: if your solution to the min wage issue is to tell those people...

[skindogone]

..."Go to school! Learn new skills, you lazy asses!"

...then who would replace them to work in the service industry? How could those industries survive if so many of the workers make minimum wage?

Keep in mind we are including state minimum wages here - not just the federal one. Right now anyone making a state minimum wage is living in poverty. Working up to 40 hours a week Is not enough for these people to live financially stable lives.

42% of American workers make less than $15 per hour. What is your solution to helping these people out of poverty?

You people are full of bitching but you have no real solutions.

Add to that the fact that everyone is at their equilibrium (or hovering around it rather) as any reasonable compassionate

- Skindog on a LG-H901 and SM-P600

Indifference is a choice!

 

[hadit]

And the point is......what? Why did they choose to work somewhere that they didn't make enough money to put food on their table? If everyone left, then Walmart would have no choice but to raise their pay rates to attract labor. That's the beauty of the free market. The people working their were clearly happy with their employment as they not only agreed to work for that much but chose to stay there.

The point is that they retaliated like I pointed out from your own link. How did you lose sight of my point?

People don't cut off their nose to spite their face when it comes to money and successful businesses. You view everything like an immature 6th grader. Walmart shut down their business because the minimum wage made it unsustainable. How is it "retaliation" to close the doors of a successful business?

How can the specific store being doing great but the wage was unsustainable? Its retaliation because it takes that tax revenue out of the city that raised the minimum wage. Why dont you have someone explain to you how cities get their revenue in regards to businesses.

Sounds like the city made a strategic mistake. All Walmart has to do then is open a bunch of stores 50 feet outside city limits. Did they in fact do that?

No they couldnt do that. The geography and zoning in Oakland wont permit that I am familiar with this since I grew up there. However they do have Walmarts in cities right next to Oakland such as San Leandro and Alameda.

The city obviously made a strategic mistake by increasing the cost of doing business so much.

 

[P@triot]

The point is that they retaliated like I pointed out from your own link. How did you lose sight of my point?

People don't cut off their nose to spite their face when it comes to money and successful businesses. You view everything like an immature 6th grader. Walmart shut down their business because the minimum wage made it unsustainable. How is it "retaliation" to close the doors of a successful business?

How can the specific store being doing great but the wage was unsustainable? Its retaliation because it takes that tax revenue out of the city that raised the minimum wage. Why dont you have someone explain to you how cities get their revenue in regards to businesses.

Sounds like the city made a strategic mistake. All Walmart has to do then is open a bunch of stores 50 feet outside city limits. Did they in fact do that?

No they couldnt do that. The geography and zoning in Oakland wont permit that I am familiar with this since I grew up there. However they do have Walmarts in cities right next to Oakland such as San Leandro and Alameda.

The city obviously made a strategic mistake by increasing the cost of doing business so much.

It's painfully obvious to everyone other than liberals...

 

[paulitician]

Greedy white Republican dude wants all poor folks to be disappeared. In his warped greedy little brain, he views the poor as unwashed 'Untouchables.' They shouldn't be allowed to exist. These are the kind of greedy bastids you're dealing with. So don't spend too much time trying to reason with them. They'll never get it.

Bubble popping time again. "Greedy white Republican dudes" are poor folks too. You're not really good at this, are you?

If you're poor, and you're a white Republican dude, you're voting against you're own best interests. The greedy white Republican dudes you worship, truly despise you. They only want you to be an obedient slave worker,

 

[P@triot]

If you're poor, and you're a white Republican dude, you're voting against you're own best interests. The greedy white Republican dudes you worship, truly despise you. They only want you to be an obedient slave worker,

If you're wealthy, poor, middle class, black, white, hispanic, straight, gay, male, female, or anything else and your voting Dumbocrat, you're voting against "your own best interest".

It amazes me how you greedy, lazy people are more interested in government handouts than you are liberty. I would rather be poor and free than wealthy and enslaved. You're an embarassment to America paulitician.

 

[saveliberty]

Greedy white Republican dude wants all poor folks to be disappeared. In his warped greedy little brain, he views the poor as unwashed 'Untouchables.' They shouldn't be allowed to exist. These are the kind of greedy bastids you're dealing with. So don't spend too much time trying to reason with them. They'll never get it.

Bubble popping time again. "Greedy white Republican dudes" are poor folks too. You're not really good at this, are you?

If you're poor, and you're a white Republican dude, you're voting against you're own best interests. The greedy white Republican dudes you worship, truly despise you. They only want you to be an obedient slave worker,

Hillary thinks the same thing paulitician. She clearly has no interest in anyone outside the Beltway. Funny you would even attempt that point.

 

[hadit]

Greedy white Republican dude wants all poor folks to be disappeared. In his warped greedy little brain, he views the poor as unwashed 'Untouchables.' They shouldn't be allowed to exist. These are the kind of greedy bastids you're dealing with. So don't spend too much time trying to reason with them. They'll never get it.

Bubble popping time again. "Greedy white Republican dudes" are poor folks too. You're not really good at this, are you?

If you're poor, and you're a white Republican dude, you're voting against you're own best interests. The greedy white Republican dudes you worship, truly despise you. They only want you to be an obedient slave worker,

You say that like you actually believe it. Amazing that so many have actually come to prefer the nanny state to freedom.

 

[Asclepias]

The point is that they retaliated like I pointed out from your own link. How did you lose sight of my point?

People don't cut off their nose to spite their face when it comes to money and successful businesses. You view everything like an immature 6th grader. Walmart shut down their business because the minimum wage made it unsustainable. How is it "retaliation" to close the doors of a successful business?

How can the specific store being doing great but the wage was unsustainable? Its retaliation because it takes that tax revenue out of the city that raised the minimum wage. Why dont you have someone explain to you how cities get their revenue in regards to businesses.

Sounds like the city made a strategic mistake. All Walmart has to do then is open a bunch of stores 50 feet outside city limits. Did they in fact do that?

No they couldnt do that. The geography and zoning in Oakland wont permit that I am familiar with this since I grew up there. However they do have Walmarts in cities right next to Oakland such as San Leandro and Alameda.

The city obviously made a strategic mistake by increasing the cost of doing business so much.

Not really. Due to Walmart doing so well there I am pretty sure Target will take their spot. No one cares if its Walmart or Target. To be honest Target is actually a step up. Its going to be a PR loss for Walmart as well.

 

[P@triot]

People don't cut off their nose to spite their face when it comes to money and successful businesses. You view everything like an immature 6th grader. Walmart shut down their business because the minimum wage made it unsustainable. How is it "retaliation" to close the doors of a successful business?

How can the specific store being doing great but the wage was unsustainable? Its retaliation because it takes that tax revenue out of the city that raised the minimum wage. Why dont you have someone explain to you how cities get their revenue in regards to businesses.

Sounds like the city made a strategic mistake. All Walmart has to do then is open a bunch of stores 50 feet outside city limits. Did they in fact do that?

No they couldnt do that. The geography and zoning in Oakland wont permit that I am familiar with this since I grew up there. However they do have Walmarts in cities right next to Oakland such as San Leandro and Alameda.

The city obviously made a strategic mistake by increasing the cost of doing business so much.

Not really. Due to Walmart doing so well there I am pretty sure Target will take their spot. No one cares if its Walmart or Target. To be honest Target is actually a step up. Its going to be a PR loss for Walmart as well.

Listen to Nostradamus over here. Funny... for someone who thinks that it's a forgone conclusion that Target (or someone else will move in), you sure we're crying about the loss of jobs yesterday.

Of course, those loss of jobs were the result of ignorant liberal policy, but you didn't want to acknowledge that part.

 

[Asclepias]

How can the specific store being doing great but the wage was unsustainable? Its retaliation because it takes that tax revenue out of the city that raised the minimum wage. Why dont you have someone explain to you how cities get their revenue in regards to businesses.

Sounds like the city made a strategic mistake. All Walmart has to do then is open a bunch of stores 50 feet outside city limits. Did they in fact do that?

No they couldnt do that. The geography and zoning in Oakland wont permit that I am familiar with this since I grew up there. However they do have Walmarts in cities right next to Oakland such as San Leandro and Alameda.

The city obviously made a strategic mistake by increasing the cost of doing business so much.

Not really. Due to Walmart doing so well there I am pretty sure Target will take their spot. No one cares if its Walmart or Target. To be honest Target is actually a step up. Its going to be a PR loss for Walmart as well.

Listen to Nostradamus over here. Funny... for someone who thinks that it's a forgone conclusion that Target (or someone else will move in), you sure we're crying about the loss of jobs yesterday.

Of course, those loss of jobs were the result of ignorant liberal policy, but you didn't want to acknowledge that part.

Says the guy that claims people dont buy debt. Go sit on the sidelines. We all know high finance is not your cup of tea.

 

[hadit]

People don't cut off their nose to spite their face when it comes to money and successful businesses. You view everything like an immature 6th grader. Walmart shut down their business because the minimum wage made it unsustainable. How is it "retaliation" to close the doors of a successful business?

How can the specific store being doing great but the wage was unsustainable? Its retaliation because it takes that tax revenue out of the city that raised the minimum wage. Why dont you have someone explain to you how cities get their revenue in regards to businesses.

Sounds like the city made a strategic mistake. All Walmart has to do then is open a bunch of stores 50 feet outside city limits. Did they in fact do that?

No they couldnt do that. The geography and zoning in Oakland wont permit that I am familiar with this since I grew up there. However they do have Walmarts in cities right next to Oakland such as San Leandro and Alameda.

The city obviously made a strategic mistake by increasing the cost of doing business so much.

Not really. Due to Walmart doing so well there I am pretty sure Target will take their spot. No one cares if its Walmart or Target. To be honest Target is actually a step up. Its going to be a PR loss for Walmart as well.

And Target can better handle increases in labor costs because they charge higher prices. Of course, the customers will have to pay more, but who cares about them?

 

[Asclepias]

How can the specific store being doing great but the wage was unsustainable? Its retaliation because it takes that tax revenue out of the city that raised the minimum wage. Why dont you have someone explain to you how cities get their revenue in regards to businesses.

Sounds like the city made a strategic mistake. All Walmart has to do then is open a bunch of stores 50 feet outside city limits. Did they in fact do that?

No they couldnt do that. The geography and zoning in Oakland wont permit that I am familiar with this since I grew up there. However they do have Walmarts in cities right next to Oakland such as San Leandro and Alameda.

The city obviously made a strategic mistake by increasing the cost of doing business so much.

Not really. Due to Walmart doing so well there I am pretty sure Target will take their spot. No one cares if its Walmart or Target. To be honest Target is actually a step up. Its going to be a PR loss for Walmart as well.

And Target can better handle increases in labor costs because they charge higher prices. Of course, the customers will have to pay more, but who cares about them?

People dont mind paying slightly higher prices for better quality. I know I dont. Seems like Walmart has you guys right were they want you.

 

[Arizona Willie]

Yep, there isn't any evidence for a long term effect..Of course, I'd rather there was a law that forced businesses to dole out the huge surplus to the workers instead to all going to the ceo. That would probably do more to solve the wage problem.

Yeah....because communism has worked sooooo well over the decades all over the world

========
This idea of distributing profit is NOT communism --- it's called ' PROFIT SHARING '.
Why shouldn't the people who make the product / service share in the profits?

Even Henry Ford, many many years ago, wanted his workers to make enough money to buy the cars they were making.

And you know what - Henry Ford was exceptionally successful. The business model he chose worked for him. It doesn't mean it would work for everyone. And remember, Henry Ford operated in an era when we had about 75% Constitutional government.

Now, business owners have to operate in an environment where we essentially have 20% Constitutional government. The federal government (thanks to people who share you ideology) has decimated businesses with regulations, taxes, etc. Get the government the frick out of the way and you'd see a lot more businesses able to profit share.

Here is what liberal policy delivers every time to any nation dumb enough to implement it...

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/16/w...cine-inside-venezuelas-failing-hospitals.html

========
I am soooo glad you aren't a member of my family. I would be so ashamed to be related to such an asshole.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Sounds like the city made a strategic mistake. All Walmart has to do then is open a bunch of stores 50 feet outside city limits. Did they in fact do that?

No they couldnt do that. The geography and zoning in Oakland wont permit that I am familiar with this since I grew up there. However they do have Walmarts in cities right next to Oakland such as San Leandro and Alameda.

The city obviously made a strategic mistake by increasing the cost of doing business so much.

Not really. Due to Walmart doing so well there I am pretty sure Target will take their spot. No one cares if its Walmart or Target. To be honest Target is actually a step up. Its going to be a PR loss for Walmart as well.

And Target can better handle increases in labor costs because they charge higher prices. Of course, the customers will have to pay more, but who cares about them?

People dont mind paying slightly higher prices for better quality. I know I dont. Seems like Walmart has you guys right were they want you.

If people didn't mind it we wouldn't have Walmart, Kmart, .....

 

[Asclepias]

No they couldnt do that. The geography and zoning in Oakland wont permit that I am familiar with this since I grew up there. However they do have Walmarts in cities right next to Oakland such as San Leandro and Alameda.

The city obviously made a strategic mistake by increasing the cost of doing business so much.

Not really. Due to Walmart doing so well there I am pretty sure Target will take their spot. No one cares if its Walmart or Target. To be honest Target is actually a step up. Its going to be a PR loss for Walmart as well.

And Target can better handle increases in labor costs because they charge higher prices. Of course, the customers will have to pay more, but who cares about them?

People dont mind paying slightly higher prices for better quality. I know I dont. Seems like Walmart has you guys right were they want you.

If people didn't mind it we wouldn't have Walmart, Kmart, .....

???

 

[hadit]

Sounds like the city made a strategic mistake. All Walmart has to do then is open a bunch of stores 50 feet outside city limits. Did they in fact do that?

No they couldnt do that. The geography and zoning in Oakland wont permit that I am familiar with this since I grew up there. However they do have Walmarts in cities right next to Oakland such as San Leandro and Alameda.

The city obviously made a strategic mistake by increasing the cost of doing business so much.

Not really. Due to Walmart doing so well there I am pretty sure Target will take their spot. No one cares if its Walmart or Target. To be honest Target is actually a step up. Its going to be a PR loss for Walmart as well.

And Target can better handle increases in labor costs because they charge higher prices. Of course, the customers will have to pay more, but who cares about them?

People dont mind paying slightly higher prices for better quality. I know I dont. Seems like Walmart has you guys right were they want you.

That statement is false on its face. If it were true, Walmart would be fighting to survive against Target. It is not. The truth is that a LOT of people will take cheap crap just to save a few bucks. THAT'S the truth.

 

[hadit]

The city obviously made a strategic mistake by increasing the cost of doing business so much.

Not really. Due to Walmart doing so well there I am pretty sure Target will take their spot. No one cares if its Walmart or Target. To be honest Target is actually a step up. Its going to be a PR loss for Walmart as well.

And Target can better handle increases in labor costs because they charge higher prices. Of course, the customers will have to pay more, but who cares about them?

People dont mind paying slightly higher prices for better quality. I know I dont. Seems like Walmart has you guys right were they want you.

If people didn't mind it we wouldn't have Walmart, Kmart, .....

???

He's making the point you're seeking to deny, namely that having the lowest prices moves more product. IOW, people DO mind paying more for quality. Some don't, but many do.

 

[Asclepias]

No they couldnt do that. The geography and zoning in Oakland wont permit that I am familiar with this since I grew up there. However they do have Walmarts in cities right next to Oakland such as San Leandro and Alameda.

The city obviously made a strategic mistake by increasing the cost of doing business so much.

Not really. Due to Walmart doing so well there I am pretty sure Target will take their spot. No one cares if its Walmart or Target. To be honest Target is actually a step up. Its going to be a PR loss for Walmart as well.

And Target can better handle increases in labor costs because they charge higher prices. Of course, the customers will have to pay more, but who cares about them?

People dont mind paying slightly higher prices for better quality. I know I dont. Seems like Walmart has you guys right were they want you.

That statement is false on its face. If it were true, Walmart would be fighting to survive against Target. It is not. The truth is that a LOT of people will take cheap crap just to save a few bucks. THAT'S the truth.

If the statement was false then everyone would be buying pintos instead of luxury cars like Teslas. I understand your reading comprehension is not up to par but saying people dont mind paying higher prices for quality has nothing to do with people also buying cheap crap.

 

[hadit]

The city obviously made a strategic mistake by increasing the cost of doing business so much.

Not really. Due to Walmart doing so well there I am pretty sure Target will take their spot. No one cares if its Walmart or Target. To be honest Target is actually a step up. Its going to be a PR loss for Walmart as well.

And Target can better handle increases in labor costs because they charge higher prices. Of course, the customers will have to pay more, but who cares about them?

People dont mind paying slightly higher prices for better quality. I know I dont. Seems like Walmart has you guys right were they want you.

That statement is false on its face. If it were true, Walmart would be fighting to survive against Target. It is not. The truth is that a LOT of people will take cheap crap just to save a few bucks. THAT'S the truth.

If the statement was false then everyone would be buying pintos instead of luxury cars like Teslas. I understand your reading comprehension is not up to par but saying people dont mind paying higher prices for quality has nothing to do with people also buying cheap crap.

Perhaps English is not your first language? Note that I specified a LOT of people, whereas you insisted that "People don't mind paying", vainly trying to make the point that Walmart moving out of an area will have minimal impact on the poor in that area. My statement is correct and supports a correct thesis.

 

[Asclepias]

Not really. Due to Walmart doing so well there I am pretty sure Target will take their spot. No one cares if its Walmart or Target. To be honest Target is actually a step up. Its going to be a PR loss for Walmart as well.

And Target can better handle increases in labor costs because they charge higher prices. Of course, the customers will have to pay more, but who cares about them?

People dont mind paying slightly higher prices for better quality. I know I dont. Seems like Walmart has you guys right were they want you.

That statement is false on its face. If it were true, Walmart would be fighting to survive against Target. It is not. The truth is that a LOT of people will take cheap crap just to save a few bucks. THAT'S the truth.

If the statement was false then everyone would be buying pintos instead of luxury cars like Teslas. I understand your reading comprehension is not up to par but saying people dont mind paying higher prices for quality has nothing to do with people also buying cheap crap.

Perhaps English is not your first language? Note that I specified a LOT of people, whereas you insisted that "People don't mind paying", vainly trying to make the point that Walmart moving out of an area will have minimal impact on the poor in that area. My statement is correct and supports a correct thesis.

Perhaps you need a remedial reading course because I dont see anything about you specifying "a LOT of people" in the post i responded to. Look closely. Do you even see the word "people" in your post?

And Target can better handle increases in labor costs because they charge higher prices. Of course, the customers will have to pay more, but who cares about them?