Walmart on Welfare: We support their employees so they don't have to.

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Gentleman we don't let people take jobs for whatever companies will offer them because we don't want people starving to death. Simple as that.

The minimum wage law was put in place exactly because people were taking whatever jobs they could get and companies were taking advantage of this and paying jack shit.

How does pricing low skilled people out of the job market prevent starvation?

LOL it does no such thing.

Listen, any competent business manager is going to A) have their staff EXACTLY where they need in comparison to sales , and as an example McDonalds does just this, they place labor at 20% of sales , the wage per employee doesn't matter, 20% of sales matters. so they are already running with a few people as they can get by with, if they had any less it would affect their ability to service their customers and B) pricing their products at the HIGHEST price customers are willing to pay. They didn't just make up $3.65 for a quarter pounder with cheese. That is the highest price their customers are willing to pay. If they raise the price, people won't buy as many. Again , the customer doesn't care what labor is costing , all they care about is "that quarter pounder with cheese is worth $3.65 to me"

We seen a very good example of this with Wal Mart right after the ACA became law, they cut a bunch of people down to part time trying to avoid having to pay them benefits and the almost immediate reaction from the customer was "fuck this , I'm going to Costco where I can get some service" and Wal Mart resonded by ta dah, returning to full time help.

Sometimes a company has to eat the extra labor cost to win in the long haul.

LOL it does no such thing.

I'm not going to pay $9.00 an hour to an employee that only adds $6.00 an hour of value.
So he earns $0, instead of $6. How does that prevent starvation?

So wait. You're actually suggesting that when Congress sets the minimum wage what they are actually doing is determining what a job's "value" is across industries, and across states and that all entry level jobs are "worth" the same amount?

oh that was a good one..

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Gentleman we don't let people take jobs for whatever companies will offer them because we don't want people starving to death. Simple as that.

The minimum wage law was put in place exactly because people were taking whatever jobs they could get and companies were taking advantage of this and paying jack shit.

How does pricing low skilled people out of the job market prevent starvation?

LOL it does no such thing.

Listen, any competent business manager is going to A) have their staff EXACTLY where they need in comparison to sales , and as an example McDonalds does just this, they place labor at 20% of sales , the wage per employee doesn't matter, 20% of sales matters. so they are already running with a few people as they can get by with, if they had any less it would affect their ability to service their customers and B) pricing their products at the HIGHEST price customers are willing to pay. They didn't just make up $3.65 for a quarter pounder with cheese. That is the highest price their customers are willing to pay. If they raise the price, people won't buy as many. Again , the customer doesn't care what labor is costing , all they care about is "that quarter pounder with cheese is worth $3.65 to me"

We seen a very good example of this with Wal Mart right after the ACA became law, they cut a bunch of people down to part time trying to avoid having to pay them benefits and the almost immediate reaction from the customer was "fuck this , I'm going to Costco where I can get some service" and Wal Mart resonded by ta dah, returning to full time help.

Sometimes a company has to eat the extra labor cost to win in the long haul.

LOL it does no such thing.

I'm not going to pay $9.00 an hour to an employee that only adds $6.00 an hour of value.
So he earns $0, instead of $6. How does that prevent starvation?

So wait. You're actually suggesting that when Congress sets the minimum wage what they are actually doing is determining what a job's "value" is across industries, and across states and that all entry level jobs are "worth" the same amount?

oh that was a good one..

I'm suggesting that the minimum wage prices some unskilled workers out of the job market.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Gentleman we don't let people take jobs for whatever companies will offer them because we don't want people starving to death. Simple as that.

The minimum wage law was put in place exactly because people were taking whatever jobs they could get and companies were taking advantage of this and paying jack shit.

How does pricing low skilled people out of the job market prevent starvation?

LOL it does no such thing.

Listen, any competent business manager is going to A) have their staff EXACTLY where they need in comparison to sales , and as an example McDonalds does just this, they place labor at 20% of sales , the wage per employee doesn't matter, 20% of sales matters. so they are already running with a few people as they can get by with, if they had any less it would affect their ability to service their customers and B) pricing their products at the HIGHEST price customers are willing to pay. They didn't just make up $3.65 for a quarter pounder with cheese. That is the highest price their customers are willing to pay. If they raise the price, people won't buy as many. Again , the customer doesn't care what labor is costing , all they care about is "that quarter pounder with cheese is worth $3.65 to me"

We seen a very good example of this with Wal Mart right after the ACA became law, they cut a bunch of people down to part time trying to avoid having to pay them benefits and the almost immediate reaction from the customer was "fuck this , I'm going to Costco where I can get some service" and Wal Mart resonded by ta dah, returning to full time help.

Sometimes a company has to eat the extra labor cost to win in the long haul.

LOL it does no such thing.

I'm not going to pay $9.00 an hour to an employee that only adds $6.00 an hour of value.
So he earns $0, instead of $6. How does that prevent starvation?

So wait. You're actually suggesting that when Congress sets the minimum wage what they are actually doing is determining what a job's "value" is across industries, and across states and that all entry level jobs are "worth" the same amount?

oh that was a good one..

I'm suggesting that the minimum wage prices some unskilled workers out of the job market.

So you are in effect, admitting that companies would LOVE to pay some people say $1 an hour. See we don't want that happening...........

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Gentleman we don't let people take jobs for whatever companies will offer them because we don't want people starving to death. Simple as that.

The minimum wage law was put in place exactly because people were taking whatever jobs they could get and companies were taking advantage of this and paying jack shit.

How does pricing low skilled people out of the job market prevent starvation?

LOL it does no such thing.

Listen, any competent business manager is going to A) have their staff EXACTLY where they need in comparison to sales , and as an example McDonalds does just this, they place labor at 20% of sales , the wage per employee doesn't matter, 20% of sales matters. so they are already running with a few people as they can get by with, if they had any less it would affect their ability to service their customers and B) pricing their products at the HIGHEST price customers are willing to pay. They didn't just make up $3.65 for a quarter pounder with cheese. That is the highest price their customers are willing to pay. If they raise the price, people won't buy as many. Again , the customer doesn't care what labor is costing , all they care about is "that quarter pounder with cheese is worth $3.65 to me"

We seen a very good example of this with Wal Mart right after the ACA became law, they cut a bunch of people down to part time trying to avoid having to pay them benefits and the almost immediate reaction from the customer was "fuck this , I'm going to Costco where I can get some service" and Wal Mart resonded by ta dah, returning to full time help.

Sometimes a company has to eat the extra labor cost to win in the long haul.

LOL it does no such thing.

I'm not going to pay $9.00 an hour to an employee that only adds $6.00 an hour of value.
So he earns $0, instead of $6. How does that prevent starvation?

So wait. You're actually suggesting that when Congress sets the minimum wage what they are actually doing is determining what a job's "value" is across industries, and across states and that all entry level jobs are "worth" the same amount?

oh that was a good one..

I'm suggesting that the minimum wage prices some unskilled workers out of the job market.

So you are in effect, admitting that companies would LOVE to pay some people say $1 an hour. See we don't want that happening...........

I'm admitting that if a worker only does $6 worth of work an hour, forcing a company to pay him $9 an hour is not doing the worker a favor.
He'll either be fired or never hired in the first place.
Why do you want that to happen?

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Gentleman we don't let people take jobs for whatever companies will offer them because we don't want people starving to death. Simple as that.

The minimum wage law was put in place exactly because people were taking whatever jobs they could get and companies were taking advantage of this and paying jack shit.

How does pricing low skilled people out of the job market prevent starvation?

LOL it does no such thing.

Listen, any competent business manager is going to A) have their staff EXACTLY where they need in comparison to sales , and as an example McDonalds does just this, they place labor at 20% of sales , the wage per employee doesn't matter, 20% of sales matters. so they are already running with a few people as they can get by with, if they had any less it would affect their ability to service their customers and B) pricing their products at the HIGHEST price customers are willing to pay. They didn't just make up $3.65 for a quarter pounder with cheese. That is the highest price their customers are willing to pay. If they raise the price, people won't buy as many. Again , the customer doesn't care what labor is costing , all they care about is "that quarter pounder with cheese is worth $3.65 to me"

We seen a very good example of this with Wal Mart right after the ACA became law, they cut a bunch of people down to part time trying to avoid having to pay them benefits and the almost immediate reaction from the customer was "fuck this , I'm going to Costco where I can get some service" and Wal Mart resonded by ta dah, returning to full time help.

Sometimes a company has to eat the extra labor cost to win in the long haul.

LOL it does no such thing.

I'm not going to pay $9.00 an hour to an employee that only adds $6.00 an hour of value.
So he earns $0, instead of $6. How does that prevent starvation?

So wait. You're actually suggesting that when Congress sets the minimum wage what they are actually doing is determining what a job's "value" is across industries, and across states and that all entry level jobs are "worth" the same amount?

oh that was a good one..

I'm suggesting that the minimum wage prices some unskilled workers out of the job market.

So you are in effect, admitting that companies would LOVE to pay some people say $1 an hour. See we don't want that happening...........

I'm admitting that if a worker only does $6 worth of work an hour, forcing a company to pay him $9 an hour is not doing the worker a favor.
He'll either be fired or never hired in the first place.
Why do you want that to happen?

To be frank about it, I don't care about the worker who can't , or won't, make himself worth whatever the minimum wage is, he can fucking starve for all I care.

What I DO care about is that companies pay an employee enough so that one person working full time with no dependents does NOT qualify for welfare.

Other than that, it isn't my problem if someone is too stupid, lazy, or incompetent to earn a paycheck.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Gentleman we don't let people take jobs for whatever companies will offer them because we don't want people starving to death. Simple as that.

The minimum wage law was put in place exactly because people were taking whatever jobs they could get and companies were taking advantage of this and paying jack shit.

How does pricing low skilled people out of the job market prevent starvation?

LOL it does no such thing.

Listen, any competent business manager is going to A) have their staff EXACTLY where they need in comparison to sales , and as an example McDonalds does just this, they place labor at 20% of sales , the wage per employee doesn't matter, 20% of sales matters. so they are already running with a few people as they can get by with, if they had any less it would affect their ability to service their customers and B) pricing their products at the HIGHEST price customers are willing to pay. They didn't just make up $3.65 for a quarter pounder with cheese. That is the highest price their customers are willing to pay. If they raise the price, people won't buy as many. Again , the customer doesn't care what labor is costing , all they care about is "that quarter pounder with cheese is worth $3.65 to me"

We seen a very good example of this with Wal Mart right after the ACA became law, they cut a bunch of people down to part time trying to avoid having to pay them benefits and the almost immediate reaction from the customer was "fuck this , I'm going to Costco where I can get some service" and Wal Mart resonded by ta dah, returning to full time help.

Sometimes a company has to eat the extra labor cost to win in the long haul.

LOL it does no such thing.

I'm not going to pay $9.00 an hour to an employee that only adds $6.00 an hour of value.
So he earns $0, instead of $6. How does that prevent starvation?

So wait. You're actually suggesting that when Congress sets the minimum wage what they are actually doing is determining what a job's "value" is across industries, and across states and that all entry level jobs are "worth" the same amount?

oh that was a good one..

I'm suggesting that the minimum wage prices some unskilled workers out of the job market.

So you are in effect, admitting that companies would LOVE to pay some people say $1 an hour. See we don't want that happening...........

I'm admitting that if a worker only does $6 worth of work an hour, forcing a company to pay him $9 an hour is not doing the worker a favor.
He'll either be fired or never hired in the first place.
Why do you want that to happen?

To be frank about it, I don't care about the worker who can't , or won't, make himself worth whatever the minimum wage is, he can fucking starve for all I care.

What I DO care about is that companies pay an employee enough so that one person working full time with no dependents does NOT qualify for welfare.

Other than that, it isn't my problem if someone is too stupid, lazy, or incompetent to earn a paycheck.

The best first step would be to deport 10 million low-skilled illegals who are driving down wages for low-skilled Americans.

 

[paulitician]

Yeah, go on Dummies. Just keep cheering for those low wages. Greedy Corporations like Walmart thank you very much.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yeah, go on Dummies. Just keep cheering for those lower wages. Greedy Corporations like Walmart thank you very much.

And you can keep cheering for higher unemployment for the unskilled and the young.

 

[paulitician]

Yeah, go on Dummies. Just keep cheering for those lower wages. Greedy Corporations like Walmart thank you very much.

And you can keep cheering for higher unemployment for the unskilled and the young.

Justifying and cheering for low wages is ridiculous. I'm actually ashamed of many of my Conservative friends. They need to stand up for Workers more often. Being a Conservative doesn't mean you're obligated to defend Corporations. How does the Republican Party plan on winning National Elections in the future? Constantly alienating the working man isn't gonna attract a bigger base. The Party needs to work on that.

 

[House]

This whole minimum wage debacle is stemming from the fact that idiots are trying to raise a family off of jobs that were never meant to be used for that purpose.

Burger flippers and cashiers were never meant to be career paths. They exist as a foot in the door for school age kids and adults that could use some extra cash.

Now, people are trying to make a career path without the necessity of actual effort to advance, and that undermines all the rest of the workers that actually give a damn about work ethics and resume building.

 

[paulitician]

This whole minimum wage debacle is stemming from the fact that idiots are trying to raise a family off of jobs that were never meant to be used for that purpose.

Burger flippers and cashiers were never meant to be career paths. They exist as a foot in the door for school age kids and adults that could use some extra cash.

Now, people are trying to make a career path without the necessity of actual effort to advance, and that undermines all the rest of the workers that actually give a damn about work ethics and resume building.

The Republican Party cannot win the Minimum Wage debate. There's too many American Workers suffering right now. If they're smart, they'll give up and move on past the debate. It's a Lose/Lose proposition for them.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

This whole minimum wage debacle is stemming from the fact that idiots are trying to raise a family off of jobs that were never meant to be used for that purpose.

Burger flippers and cashiers were never meant to be career paths. They exist as a foot in the door for school age kids and adults that could use some extra cash.

Now, people are trying to make a career path without the necessity of actual effort to advance, and that undermines all the rest of the workers that actually give a damn about work ethics and resume building.

The Republican Party cannot win the Minimum Wage debate. There's too many American Workers suffering right now. If they're smart, they'll give up and move on past the debate. It's a Lose/Lose proposition for them.

The SMART move would be to suggest a $10/Hr

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yeah, go on Dummies. Just keep cheering for those lower wages. Greedy Corporations like Walmart thank you very much.

And you can keep cheering for higher unemployment for the unskilled and the young.

Justifying and cheering for low wages is ridiculous. I'm actually ashamed of many of my Conservative friends. They need to stand up for Workers more often. Being a Conservative doesn't mean you're obligated to defend Corporations. How does the Republican Party plan on winning National Elections in the future? Constantly alienating the working man isn't gonna attract a bigger base. The Party needs to work on that.

I'm not cheering for low wages. I'm tired of government regulations making things worse.
Liberals who cheer government mandates that cost jobs are almost as stupid as a libertarian
who does the same.

Seal the border, deport 8 or 10 million illegals, and wages at the low end of the scale will rise.
Run on that plan and watch the working man support your candidate.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

This whole minimum wage debacle is stemming from the fact that idiots are trying to raise a family off of jobs that were never meant to be used for that purpose.

Burger flippers and cashiers were never meant to be career paths. They exist as a foot in the door for school age kids and adults that could use some extra cash.

Now, people are trying to make a career path without the necessity of actual effort to advance, and that undermines all the rest of the workers that actually give a damn about work ethics and resume building.

The Republican Party cannot win the Minimum Wage debate. There's too many American Workers suffering right now. If they're smart, they'll give up and move on past the debate. It's a Lose/Lose proposition for them.

The SMART move would be to suggest a $10/Hr

Because higher unemployment and more welfare is a winner for Republicans. LOL!

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

This whole minimum wage debacle is stemming from the fact that idiots are trying to raise a family off of jobs that were never meant to be used for that purpose.

Burger flippers and cashiers were never meant to be career paths. They exist as a foot in the door for school age kids and adults that could use some extra cash.

Now, people are trying to make a career path without the necessity of actual effort to advance, and that undermines all the rest of the workers that actually give a damn about work ethics and resume building.

The Republican Party cannot win the Minimum Wage debate. There's too many American Workers suffering right now. If they're smart, they'll give up and move on past the debate. It's a Lose/Lose proposition for them.

The SMART move would be to suggest a $10/Hr

Because higher unemployment and more welfare is a winner for Republicans. LOL!

Not alienating people left and right would be a start for the Republican Party. Do you NOT want to win? I mean seriously.

 

[Moonglow]

I've worked myself up from nothing to a state of extreme poverty.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

This whole minimum wage debacle is stemming from the fact that idiots are trying to raise a family off of jobs that were never meant to be used for that purpose.

Burger flippers and cashiers were never meant to be career paths. They exist as a foot in the door for school age kids and adults that could use some extra cash.

Now, people are trying to make a career path without the necessity of actual effort to advance, and that undermines all the rest of the workers that actually give a damn about work ethics and resume building.

The Republican Party cannot win the Minimum Wage debate. There's too many American Workers suffering right now. If they're smart, they'll give up and move on past the debate. It's a Lose/Lose proposition for them.

The SMART move would be to suggest a $10/Hr

Because higher unemployment and more welfare is a winner for Republicans. LOL!

Not alienating people left and right would be a start for the Republican Party. Do you NOT want to win? I mean seriously.

Because higher unemployment and more welfare will reduce alienation? Seriously?

 

[paulitician]

This whole minimum wage debacle is stemming from the fact that idiots are trying to raise a family off of jobs that were never meant to be used for that purpose.

Burger flippers and cashiers were never meant to be career paths. They exist as a foot in the door for school age kids and adults that could use some extra cash.

Now, people are trying to make a career path without the necessity of actual effort to advance, and that undermines all the rest of the workers that actually give a damn about work ethics and resume building.

The Republican Party cannot win the Minimum Wage debate. There's too many American Workers suffering right now. If they're smart, they'll give up and move on past the debate. It's a Lose/Lose proposition for them.

The SMART move would be to suggest a $10/Hr

Because higher unemployment and more welfare is a winner for Republicans. LOL!

Not alienating people left and right would be a start for the Republican Party. Do you NOT want to win? I mean seriously.

Because higher unemployment and more welfare will reduce alienation? Seriously?

Defending and cheering for low wages isn't very appealing to average working Americans. The Republican Party needs to stand up for the working man more often. Otherwise, it risks losing that vote forever.

 

[Andylusion]

The minimum wage is much like communism... sounds great in theory, but human greed makes it implausible in practice.

But is it greed? Really? So you are omniscient, and known the thoughts and motivations of every single employer on the planet, and can say with certainty that the *ONLY* reason employees are not paid much more is greed?

How many of any low-margin business have you run? Better yet, have you ever run any business at all?

Is it possible that in some isolated instances, that greed is the reason employees are not paid more? Sure.

But I was guess that's a small fraction of all the jobs out there.

My experience from *talking* to CEOs and business owners instead of *attacking and prejudging* them, is that the primary reason they don't pay more is because they simply can't afford to.

When I was in college, I worked for a Cadillac Dealership. In the 70s and 80s, the dealership had 3 apprenticeship positions. They had two mechanic positions, and one body shop position. Nearly all the mechanics they had, when I worked there, had all started off earning minimum wage as an apprentice.

In the early 90s, when the minimum wage went up, they eliminated 1, and had 2 left. In the mid 90s when they increased it again, they cut another one, and had one left. When I was working there, they said their current apprenticeship guy, would be their last.

Instead of being a brain dead leftist, and attacking them for being greedy for eliminating jobs... I asked way.

The manager explained that, with an apprenticeship, the dealership loses money for the first 6 months, if not the entire year depending on how quickly the apprentice picks up his job.

You can't pay an apprentice on a per job basis, like you can a trained mechanic, because they are so slow, doing 1 or 2 jobs a day, they'll starve, and leave.

So you pay them by the hour, and they only get 1 or 2 jobs done a day.

Additionally, you have to pay a mentor, the guy training the apprentice for his time. He could be knocking out jobs, collecting money, and instead he's teaching the new guy how to hold his lug nuts. That's money loss to the veteran mechanic. So now the dealership is paying him too.

And then on top of that, anything the Apprentice screws up, or any car he breaks, now the dealership has to not only pay the Apprentice his hourly wage for breaking something, but they also have to pay the mentor to fix it.

If that wasn't enough, there is also the cost of money not made. Apprentices usually don't have their own tools. So now you have the apprentice borrowing tools, and using a repair bay and equipment, that could have been used by a trained mechanic to make money.

The dealership manager said the bottom line is, it's too expensive to have an apprenticeship anymore. They simply lose too much money. Back in the 70s when it was $1.50/hr, or the 80s, at 3/hr, the dealership could afford to absorb the hit.

Now.... they can't. It's too expensive to pay someone to lose the business tons of money.

But here in leftard world, we complain there are not enough jobs, complain the little man can't get ahead, and then demand that we reason the minimum wage, and when that doesn't help.... 'well they are just greedy!'.... no. You're own policies are killing your own goals. That's the problem.

 

[bripat9643]

Yeah, go on Dummies. Just keep cheering for those lower wages. Greedy Corporations like Walmart thank you very much.

And you can keep cheering for higher unemployment for the unskilled and the young.

Justifying and cheering for low wages is ridiculous. I'm actually ashamed of many of my Conservative friends. They need to stand up for Workers more often. Being a Conservative doesn't mean you're obligated to defend Corporations. How does the Republican Party plan on winning National Elections in the future? Constantly alienating the working man isn't gonna attract a bigger base. The Party needs to work on that.

I'm not cheering for low wages. I'm tired of government regulations making things worse.
Liberals who cheer government mandates that cost jobs are almost as stupid as a libertarian
who does the same.

Seal the border, deport 8 or 10 million illegals, and wages at the low end of the scale will rise.
Run on that plan and watch the working man support your candidate.

Libertarians don't cheer government mandates of any kind, so your comparison isn't appropriate.