I think those of us who a self-described "conservatives" have a hard
time listening to Mr. Sanders.Yet he is absolutely right. Wal-Mart
is one the biggest government leeches there are. They intentionally work people
just less than the required time to be considered a "full-time" employee
so they don't have to offer health insurance. Many employees are forced to
use WIC, food stamps and other government assistance programs. Obviously I would encourage all Wal-Mart employees to go out and get an
education so you don't have to depend on them. Make yourself more
marketable to employers to the point where people must pay you more to have you.
With no skills, you aren't marketable. I worked there for
awhile 3 years ago. As a 27 year old who just finished college I now make more
than the general manger of the store I worked at. My advice to employees: get
out. While legal, Wal-Mart will intentionally push the boundaries of what they
can get away with. Success is good, but not at the expense of the government
Great observation, one that has been made many times on these comments.The
notion that he wealthy are a precious commodity and can't afford to pay
people what they are worth, while raking in obscene profits is offensive. The
fact that they encourage their employees to seek government assistance is
sickening.Walmarts not alone, there's an epidemic of
selfishness among our precious wealthy, encouraged by the "I built it all by
myself, for I am an island in the sea of humanity. They are
incorrect, and at some point the other 90% who work for a living (if history
repeats) will clear the slate for a better system, one where the citizens, not
the corporate elite and a few ultra wealthy families run the country.
I think that Bernie may have also mentioned that the 6 main Walmart heirs have a
combined net worth greater than the bottom 41% of American citizens!How's that for income inequality?
‘Sen. Bernie Sanders: Why is the government subsidizing Walmart?’“The idea that anybody could suggest that we are not seeing
massive income and wealth inequality is beyond my comprehension,” Sanders
said in his opening remarks.Later he invokes the Walton family, the
richest family in the world and the founders of Walmart, asking the panel if the
wealthiest family in America should receive government assistance.He
answered his own question. “It turns out that they are the largest
recipient of welfare in America because when you pay workers starvation wages,
which is what Walmart does, how do the workers at Walmart survive?”He goes on say that these workers collect benefits from the government
because Walmart doesn’t pay them enough. So in essence, he tells the panel
that Walmart takes welfare.=========== Amen, Amen &
AMEN!God Bless Sen. Sanders
The Senator's questioning deserves close attention.
Exactly why I DO NOT shop at Walmart. But Walmart is only one of countless
predatory businesses in America. McDonalds, Olive Garden, Poppa Johns . . . .
the list is almost endless.
@ Ronnie W.Well said, and congratulations. On another note, don't
shop or partronize Wal-Mart. As citizens we can speak with our wallets as well.
Their earnings annoucement yesterday was poor and the company is not doing well
because more and more people have decided to take their money elsewhere.
@FTThe problem is that Wal Mart is just the biggest example. You think
Shopko, Kmart or Target employee's get paid any better? Same on the fast
food side, pretty much every major chain outside of In-N-Out pays these same
kind of wages. Something has to change.
The CEO of Wal-Mart makes as much in an hour as a typical Wal-Mart employee
makes in a year. The direct heirs of Sam Walton get as much in dividend income
every single minute as an average employee makes in a year. But they can't
afford to pay more than starvation wages?
I have always been fundamentally opposed to raising the minimum wage because I
dislike government intrusion into the free market. However, as I've
thought about it this morning, it would be the vital first step toward removing
what Mr. Sanders has accurately described as "corporate welfare". BUT,
this first step should under no circumstances be initiated without the
accompanying second step, which is a matching (based on income level) increase
in the threshold to qualify for all forms of government welfare/assistance. If
the government money is not removed from the marketplace at the same time the
private money is added, then the prices of goods and services will rise because
people have more money to spend. If this happens the higher prices businesses
inevitably pass along to consumers, to compensate for the higher wages, will not
be balanced by reductions in our taxpayer funded entitlement programs; which
will still be as crippling and unsustainable as they are today. Furthermore,
any money saved by raising entitlement qualifications should be automatically
applied to reducing the national debt and not simply reallocated to another
spending program. Spread the word.
One thing that is missing here is that the 10.10 minimum wage set by Obama for
federal workers is lower than the beginning wage for Walmart employees. So it
does nothing to relieve the problem of the workers there.
Simple solution:U.S. government hire all the unemployed workers at a
living wage. Lay a tax on all American business to pay the full cost of the
program. Employers would have to pay the living wage in order to get any
workers at all. Employers could reduce the tax by hiring all the workers. Further, get the employer out of the employee's personal business.
No more phony benefits like health insurance, retirement or profit sharing to
hide the lack of real pay. Get business out of government. Stop
political campaigns and lobbies. Provide real tax reform.In other words give the people's government to the will of the people.
The problem with the 'free market' is by definition, you will always
have winners and losers, and society has to pick up the pieces for all the
"losers" who get marginalized by their lack of skills and power to
command better wages. Walmart is often ranked as the most powerful corporation
on the face of the planet (sometimes switching with Exxon-Mobile for that
honor), so workers have little say on their bargaining power for more pay.I read that Walmart has significant turnover simply because it is
cheaper to simply let "experienced" workers go and bring/train in new
people to replace them than pay the higher salaries for more productive workers.
It's not what is taught in business schools, but workers can't tell
companies what to do. It's sad when your fate as an employee is at the
mercy to managers more concerned with "corporate policy" regardless of
logic.I'll give Walmart credit, however. Last November, it had
a food drive for their employees and that helped their workers have a better
Thanksgiving. Very thoughtful!
Bernie has one thing right: Subsidizing Wal-Mart has nothing to do with
Capitalism. However, the other part of just as faulty. Federal government
involvement in minimum wage is socialistic and ends up keeping the poor poor!
For the most part, business loves minimum wage because they will just raise
their prices. Even Bernie understands this, which is why it is a charade. What
does it really matter to him? He's a millionaire and doesn't care
about the poor! In the end, he gets to live off the labor of millions who are
keep in poverty by government fiat! Unfortunately, many Americans are fooled by
this false charity by politicians. Wake up America!
Con1I'm not sure where you found your information but pay
scale.com lists the following wages for Walmart employees.Sales
associate $7.61-$12.64Pharmacy tech $8.77-$14.42Overnight stocker $7.77-$13.00It looks like they are starting at
about the same wages I was making in the summer of 1976 working heavy
construction, to pay for college!
WOW!The socialists and class warriors are up early today.I urge all the generous people criticizing Walmart to start their own business
and pay people whatever their generous hearts consider to be "adequate"
wages, and not keep a dime for their own efforts."The trouble
with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money to
spend."Will anyone criticize the big sports stars for the
megabucks they get paid and do not share with everyone else? Or entertainment
stars? Or, is it only people who work hard in real businesses providing
essential goods and services and JOBS who are the bad guys.
You force Wallmart to raise the minimum wage to $10 and Wallmart reacts - like
any other business - by laying off workers and raising the prices of their
products. Now EVERYONE gets hurt. Socialists should NEVER be allowed to
influence economic policy!! Socialist refuse to allow the free market to set the
wages because they don't believe in the free market...never have. There is
NOTHING in a Socialist's mind that has anything to do with protecting
freedom..nothing. If Wallmart starts losing employees due to low wages then
Wallmart will increase their pay on their own...that is called Capitalism and
competition in the free market. Liberalism is all about FORCE. Capitalism is all
about freedom of choice. America was born as a free country. Socialism equates
The fact is that business pays for every person in the United States of America.
Only now, business forces the employed workers to pay for the unemployed
workers food, clothing and shelter out of the wages of employed workers. Full employment guaranteed by the government under the plan I proposed
would:Cause a great reduction if not the complete elimination of
poverty, welfare, charity, food stamps and improve the chances for equal
opportunity for all people. Not do away with Capitalism and the
possibility for a person to excel in wealth. Not take away any
freedom from people, only from business who has no need for freedom.Provide a more stable economy by preventing the antics of business to prevent
a free market.
@ Ultra Bob 9:41And where would "the government" get the
money to pay everyone for everything? You are back to taking
earnings from the hard working "makers" and idealistically giving it to
the "takers." Basically full fledged communism.No one is
forced to work at Walmart. They are free to work for Ultra Bob at his generous
wage levels if they want to.
@patriotA study found that to raise minimum wage to 10 dollars, Walmart
would have to increase prices of their products around 1-2%. That's not
crippling at all. Costco manages this just fine.
I often hear the statement: "The trouble with socialism is that eventually
you run out of other people's money to spend".Is there any
one out there who can help me understand what they are saying?
One could search long and hard to find an idea such as guaranteed full
employment as a fix to a problem, but there is no evidence on God's green
earth from Adam's exit from the garden to 2014 that would remotely show
success with such foolishness. Of course, one recent example of someone who
promised something similar would be Hitler before the holocaust. I would just as
soon avoid a repeat of that. If there was ever a power grab of greater epic
proportions, it would be to give a leader the power to implement such foolish
Thank you DN for including this video!Walmart is proof that trickle
down doesn't work. The Waltons are so rich because they make a lot of
money, but don't distribute it among their workers. There's a lot of talk among some conservatives about the "makers"
and the "takers." Workers of America make the products and produce the
labor that runs this country. Their labor also creates the wealth that makes
some people rich and provides the capital to buy all the goods and services in
our economy. It's also workers, not the wealthy, who volunteer their lives
to defend this country. So I would submit that the makers are those who work
and the takers are those who steal more than their fair share of the proceeds of
productivity. After all, flipping burgers isn't a valuable skill, but
it's worth a lot to those who grow rich because of burgers and other simple
services. Their workers should not have to go on welfare just so their
employers can have more profit. The final insult is the current political
attacks on the poor.
Ironically, Walmart is the greatest threat to capitalism. A growing monopsony,
it simply drives out of business any competitor it wants to. It keeps tens of
thousands of workers on starvation wages, thus perpetuating the poverty cycle
and destroying the very consumer base it relies on. It acts as a parasite on the
public coffers, as Sen. Sanders points out so well. Theodore Roosevelt would
have known what to do with a Walmart in his time.
I don't shop at Walmart because their products are substandard quality and
everything comes from China. Basically, Walmart funds the Chinese military.That said, Bernie Sanders provides many hours of comedy on CSPAN. His
disheveled looks along with his far, far left propaganda make me laugh. He
alwasy looks like he just woke up.Unfortunately, I may have to agree
with Bernie on this one issue. Walmart hasn't been a good corporate
citizen since Sam Walton died. But for his kids, who apparently didn't
learn much from him, it is all about money and power. Seems to be a theme in
Arkansas. I recall a politician from Arkansas that's like that. So's
Ultra Bob: "I often hear the statement: 'The trouble with socialism is
that eventually you run out of other people's money to spend.' Is
there any one out there who can help me understand what they are saying?"It goes right along with another popular saying "Put your money
where your mouth is." Almost all the socialists talk about spreading other
people's wealth around, not their own.Obama loves to talk all
day about "income inequality", but I might take his words a little more
seriously if he would distribute a little of his own income. He makes millions
(definitely in the top 1%) and takes extravagant family vacations on the
taxpayer dime. When I hear that he is giving a huge portion of this
own wealth away or taking a vacation locally instead of flying around the world
to exotic places, then I won't roll my eyes every time I hear him talk.
Midwest MomSoldiers Grove, WIAgreed!Great comment! Spot
on.===== Irony GuyBountiful, UtahIronically,
Walmart is the greatest threat to capitalism. [Agreed! The
funny thing, they are doing giving more to Communists in China than they are to
AMERICA! and the pro-business Conservative see no problem with this?...]
I would suggest the federal government remove tax deductions and incentives for
companies that pay poverty wages. We as taxpayers should only give tax
incentives and deductions for companies that actually provide decent paying
jobs.Otherwise it is just corporate welfare.
bandersenSaint George, UTOf course, one recent example of
someone who promised something similar would be Hitler before the holocaust. ======= Really?Once again with a Hitler reference -
once again, getting it all wrong, and once again getting it all
backwards.Hitler took care of the unemployed the same way he took
care of anyone else "not fit for the New Society" -- Liberals, Communists, Homosexuals, Abortion Doctors, Addicts, Illegal Immigrants, Porn,Terminally ill, the
Homeless, and of course, the Jews. The uber-Germany
Nationalists and the Military Industrial Complex LOVED him.To them, he was
a True Patriot, "Taking Germany back" from the passifist Liberal
Weirmar Republic.BTW -- Hitler NEVER would have allowed buying
food, clothing and other daily necessities from his sworn enemies, let alone
letting a Company's employees leech from the National Treasury to
survive.But Conservatives let WalMart and other companies send
$Trillions of dollars annually to China, in fact -- they are their biggest
Ultra Bob: William Sumner said, "A man who can command another man's
labor and self-denial for the support of his own existence is a privileged
person of the highest species conceivable on earth...The working man needs no
improvement in his condition except to be freed from the parasites who are
living on him." He also said this, "History is only a tiresome
repetition of one story...Persons and classes have sought to win possession of
the power of the state in order to live luxuriously out of the earnings of
others...A man whose labor and self-denial may be diverted from his maintenance
to that of some other man is not a free man, and approaches more or less toward
the position of a slave." Crony capitalism is not liberty and as long as you
put evil men in power, whether in a capitalistic system of socialistic system,
the poor and the working man will be hurt. Socialism is just communism light. A
war is brewing in America, but it is not one of arms, but of ideas. Liberty
I concur, the socialists are out in force today.The fact is we are
not subsidizing Walmart. We are subsidizing people with no desire to develop
marketable skills. We are also allowing politicians to vilify a company in
order to achieve their political adgenda.Out of all of the people
working in the labor force, only 2% earn minimum wage. The rest earn more than
that. Then, most of the people earning minimum wage are Highschool kids and
college kids paying their way through school.So, why do we need to
raise wages for less than 1% of workers?
All right you liberals who don't believe in trickle down. Tell us where
trickle up has actually worked? The trickle up idea/anti-capitalist rhetoric
that you believe is just collectivism. So tell us, where has collectivism
actually worked?You say that capitalism is a failure, yet what is
your alternative, socialism, communism, fascism? The alternatives to capitalism
are all huge failures.Some of the more devious people will say that
we need a combination of collectivism and capitalism, but that is exactly what
got us to this point. You want to use capitalism to fund your collectivism,
then blame capitalism when collectivism fails.So, tell us, where has
your collectivist ideas actually been able to match capitalism in terms of
prosperity and lifting people out of poverty.
re: liberal larry"...the 6 main Walmart heirs have a combined
net worth greater than the bottom 41% of American citizens! How's that for
income inequality?"More like irony. Its the bottom 41% that make
up at least 95% of Walmarts patrons.
to FlashbackDon't forget Jerry Jones (the best GM in the NFL).
to Redshirt1701 about lunch time"Tell us where trickle up has
actually worked?" Uh, Walmart. You obviously have not been
airnaut (aka Open Minded Mormon):Capitalism respects no borders. If
money flows freely to the best value (you know...like when it is in the hands of
a shopper), then it will flow to countries where productive workers and
favorable business regulations exists. If we want to compete with China, then we
must compete, not try to change all the rules.We might not like all
the things pure capitalism brings, but any attempt to regulate it to death will
be to the detriment of everyone (especially the poor).
@JoeCapitalistAt the same time you have to regulate capitalism. There are
examples of pure unfettered capitalism in the world. Look at Somalia for
example, if you have money you can buy anything you want. Literally anything,
you want drugs, you can get them with enough money. You want to buy a human
being to be you slave, just pony up the cash. You want to buy a large number of
military grade weapons, same thing. Capitalism without regulation is a system
run purely on greed, with no regard for human life or safety. In order for
Capitalism to work there must be regulation. Period.
To "Mister J" I don't think you are paying attention. Trickle up
means that you dump all sorts of free stuff on the people in hopes that they
improve their lives. According to Senator Sanders the people receive stuff, but
their lives are not improving. So, apparently it isn't working at Walmart.
Ultra Bob Bandersen.IMO, Hitler was a product of the oppression
imposed on the German people after the First World War. They are a proud and
intelligent people, desperately wanted a leader that would lift them out of
their misery and give them back self respect. Hitler used the situation to grab
power and tried to rule the world. The economic oppression that we are
seeing in the United States has been repeated time after time for all of
history. I agree that a war is brewing in America...of ideas of liberty versus
slavery, but you may have the wrong idea of who the players are who are on the
side of liberty and those for slavery. Redshirt1701.It's common knowledge that the sum of the group, a collective, is greater
than the sum of the individuals. Every government, every organization of any
kind is a collective. Capitalism fails when it doesn't do its
job. Controlled Capitalism is probably the best system for business in America.
Uncontrolled Capitalism is the law of the jungle, survival of the fittest. The
law of the jungle is no good for the operation of a civilized society.
re:SchneeMissing the point. Let the free market decide ...not the
federal government. Actually - let the states decide!! How about that! In the
Dakotas there is an oil boom on private land and everyone is making great money
there ...even Wallmart employees. Forcing an across the board pay increase for
everyone simply turns the economy on its head. This minimum wage increase is all
about politics and nothing more. The minimum wage is not supposed to be a
"supporting wage" for people to live on. People pay minimum wage for low
skill people ...mostly teenagers to get work experience...but of course
Obamacare takes care of that anyway doesn't it by allowing dead beats to
stay home and do water colors or drugs and get subsidized by working
people...right (according to Nancy Pelosi)?? Why work when someone else can work
for you ...The Obama Motto.
What % of Walmart employees own smartphones?True of False: If given
higher wages then Walmart employees would use it to buy nutritious food for
their families.Do you know anyone who is starving in the U.S.? Does
this level of starvation compare to those of Central Asia, Latin America, or
Africa? Are these starving people using their money to buy cheap yet filling
foods like beans and rice?Are Walmart employees living on the
street?Did Walmart employees have the opportunity to attend
community colleges or trade schools to develop skills to find higher paying
jobs?Will Walmarts owners say: "Gee. They raised the minimum
wage. I guess that means we will just have to lower our profit margins and
disappoint our shareholders to pay for the increase."? Or will Walmart
owners find new creative ways to outsource and automate more of their business
using cheaper labor in other countries?
To "Ultra Bob" but the sum of knowledge or experience of a collective is
not collectivism.Capitalism does not fail when it is allowed to
operate as just capitalism. Capitalism fails when the government control it or
competes with it. Government in the US was never intended to compete with
capitalism or to control it, yet thanks to the Progressives and liberals it is.
Government's intended purpose was to enforce contracts and keep the nation
secure. The government has little else to do.There is no such thing
as Uncontrolled capitalism. That is called anarchy, and that is not what
capitalism is about.If you want liberty, then you have to follow
capitalism. All collectivist ideologies require strong central government,
which will ultimately reduce you to little more than a slave.So
again, the challenge is yours. Tell us when collectivism has worked. When has
collectivism been able to match capitalism?
to Redshirt1701Irony & humor impaired, I see.
No news here. The Democrats want to raise the minimum wage. That is all they
ever talk about. At what point is the minimum wage high enough? Why not call for
a $20 per hour minimum wage? Why not $30 or $40 or $50 per hour minimum wage?When the minimum wage is increased, EVERYTHING is going to cost more.
And the people that only earn the minimum wage will never get ahead.The youth of today will not have a chance of getting a job if the the minimum
wage is constantly increased. Who would settle for a lifetime of minimum wage
Famous recent quote: "Americans understand that some people will earn more
money than others, and we don't resent those who, by virtue of their
efforts, achieve incredible success. That's what America's all
I don't like, or shop at, Walmart. I understand the desire to raise the
minimum wage but don't think it will bring the desired effect.The problem, as I see it, is that it is a thriving economy that drives wages
up; right now businesses have a large pool of the unemployed to draw upon. We
don't have a thriving economy because guv'mt keeps intruding, because
the corporate tax is high, because business is bogged down with too many regs.
We also have such a large labor pool because mothers go to work, and illegal
aliens clog the labor pool and bring wage levels down.This is just
another red herring. There needs to be a return to a solid manufacturing base
in this nation, with a drop in the corporate tax, and an import duty sufficient
to level the playing field with enslaved nations in Asia. There needs to be an
enforcement of e-verify not amnesty. I'd love to see a reduction in the
number of working mothers at that point, and a return to the old values of this
nation. My opinion: it won't happen, but I keep hoping.
Two things:1. Teenagers as a percent of all working age adults.2.
Jobs you think are for teenagers (and thus should pay next to nothing) as a
percent of all jobs. The latter is a much higher percentage than the
former and some of you don't seem to understand that. Someone kinda has to
work these jobs. Someone always kinda has to work these jobs. If everyone got a
master's degree... someone still has to work these jobs.
@ DN Subscriber: Mosiah 4:16-19 with emphasis on the last verse. We're
Words, words, words -As soon as we see THOSE who want more of our
stufftaken from us to give to those with less stuffSTEP UP and give
away their own stuffonly then can we know that their intentis
focused on the benefit of othersrather than their own statusand
wealthso forget their wordsand check out their private actions
I do not know why these discussions don't describe what is really going on
in the labor market. There is supply and demand like in any market. The supply
of labor right now exceeds the demand. That is why there are lower paying jobs.
If we improve demand for employment, wages will go up. Increasing Minimum
Wages will shift the market. Some will benefit, but others will loose jobs
because it will be cheaper to automate or shift employment elsewhere. I am not
hearing discussions on what we can do to improve demand for labor. That will
require stimulation of entrepreneurship, tax incentives for hiring Americans,
tax incentives for providing tuition reimbursement to employees, providing
educational assistance to those in need, etc. That is the long-term solution.
Walmart does the opposite of what the senator alleges. It helps all of us more
than government ever could. With its low prices it has grown to its current
size, but along the way has saved shoppers billions - perhaps even trillions -
of dollars. That's the way to truly benefit the average American, something
the government could never do.
Since when did income equality become a right? I don't remember reading it
in the Constitution or any of the amendments. However, I do remember reading it
in FDR's bill of rights he proposed in his 1944 state of the union address,
"Employment, with a living wage".Before we jump on the band
wagon of Wal-Mart should pay a living wage, the Government should make sure that
NONE of the members of the Armed Forces. Sen. Sanders is a senior senator, why
hasn't he gone after the president about raising the wages of our
solders.The minimum wage is a function of supply and demand. I live
in Billiings MT and McDonalds is paying entry level employees $9.50 per hour
because of low unemployment. Also only a small percentage of people who are
paid the minimum wage are supporting a family, the majority are High School and
To all the lefties on this thread:WalMart is NOT the largest
recipient of welfare. This is a ludicrous but savvy political ploy that plays
well with the uneducated and Senator Sanders political base.It is
not WalMart's job to pay its workers more than their market worth. It is
not WalMart's responsibility to make sure its workers have a $13-16,000/yr
health insurance plan, when the workers are not creating anywhere near that kind
of value for others. And if government forces WalMart to pay its workers more
than they are worth, in hourly wages and/or benefits, it will only hurt WalMart
workers the most in the end, WalMart and other employers will be incentivized to
hire fewer workers, raise prices, etc., and the economic engine will certainly
slow down.When Detroit, big Auto and Chicago/Illinois paid their
workers more than they were worth, it helped some workers for a short time, but
in the end, it bankrupted companies, cities and states. It slowed growth,
reduced employment opportunities and hurt the least mobile, least educated the
most.Senator Sanders ludicrous statements may be good politics, but
they make for horrible economics.
@CPA Howard. Not the Constitution, but the last sentence of the Declaration of
Independence. Without the latter, the former never would have been framed.
Despite all the rhetoric of the TEA Party, their constituents are mostly about
"me". How did Reagan shift the discussion at the end of the
Carter administration? By creating a common external enemy (USSR) and spending
an insane amount on defense. Bush? He got lucky with 9/11 (if one can call
that luck) and again creating an external foe (Iraq). Reagan spent on a
"cold" war and Bush on a "hot" one. Absent that, we start in on
one another, finding fault in our differences with one another. Wouldn't
it be tragic if we (poor and rich alike) persisted in activities that will lead
us to our own destruction? Hugh Nibley wrote a very nice piece on
Rome in the fourth century A.D. titled, I believe as "A Question of
Loyalty". All I can remember was it was in his collected works in the
volume titled "Ancient States". That entire volume is a pretty good
examination our current condition. Economics tells us about
businesses creating barriers to entry. The same applies to social status.
Companies should not have to provide health insurance to employees. Medicare
should be available to all and then contract out to Medicare Advantage like they
do now but pay Medicare Advantage companies less. The benefits for Medicare
should be reduced for younger people as well. Now once you have a baseline of
what the minimum benefits are for Medicare and allow companies to offer better
benefits then Medicare if the company wants to offer that to employees. I lean towards the conservative side but I really dislike wal mart. Poor
service, poor products and poor employees. Not something I support.
Ok all you genius Liberals. If raising the minimum wage to $10.10/hr will do so
much to eliminate poverty, why stop there? Really, if that is the answer, why
not $20/hr? Now we are talking about real 'hope and change.' But why
stop there? That was so easy, let's just pencil-whip poverty out of
existence! How about $40/hr? Yeah baby, now we are talking about a living
wage, by golly! Can you Liberals not understand that the free
market determines what a job is worth? If you compel an employer to pay more
for labor, what then happens to the products he sells? If the market will
support a higher price, he can pass it on to the consumer. So now you have
increased the cost of goods and services for everyone - including those with the
new higher minimum wage! Or if the market will not support a higher
price...hello pink slip.
Wal-Mart pays its workers more than any other employer will pay them. Hopefully
this is clear. A Wal-Mart worker cannot find a better-paying job anywhere.
Clear yet? And for this, we fault Wal-Mart?
Question - Who shops at Walmart? Answer - Those with low wages, including
Walmart workers. Q - So when Walmart has to raise its prices to pay
the workers more, who will be hurt by the higher prices? A - Those who
make low wages, like Walmart workers. Senator Sanders favors the
ACA, and it allows wealthy doctors and medical supply companies to receive
government subsidies. Seems like he just wants to pick winners and losers.EVERY time society makes a government safety net to help those in need,
the clever people will find a way to get their hand in the deep pocket of the
government and take a huge share. This is why the government cannot and should
not be the answer to social problems. The pocket is too deep and the corruption
In a free market economy, we all benefit from Walmart paying cheap wages through
better prices. None of us owe anyone a living. The absence of government
meddling is not a subsidy, and calling it one is very twisted logic. Minimum
wage should never be raised again, so that businesses can be free to compete and
workers can be free to find employment where ever they are able. Similarly, all
businesses should be free to avoid paying government required benefits by
limiting hours - that is the fault of the government regulations, and another
example of how messing with the free market hurts everyone. If you can't
get a job that pays enough to live the way you want, cut your standards or
increase your value as a worker. Minimum wage hurts everyone by forcing jobs
overseas, setting unrealistic living standards for unskilled laborers, and
raising prices. Higher prices hurt low wage earners far worse than they hurt
high wage earners. Pure free market economy is the way to go. If you are
feeling exploited, find something else to do with your skills or find new
@Harrison Bergeron. How would you end poverty? The truth is there
will always be people at the bottom no how hard anybody tries. It is capitalism,
but in the past most people understood a need for a safety net or a minimum
standard. The truth is minimum wage has not kept up with inflation. Your
argument on why stop at $10.10 has been a typical argument from those opposing a
minimum wage increase. No one was advocating making poor people middle class by
just pencil whipping poverty out of existence.I think maybe it is
time for the government to stop giving tax incentives and deductions to
companies that pay low wages. If the company wants to pay a minimum wage then
fine but they should not get tax breaks or deductions.
" A Wal-Mart worker cannot find a better-paying job anywhere"Very sad comment, isn't it? Yet this person says it like its a good
thing. Another person claims walmart is good for America because it has low
prices on products. Can you imagine? Like that's what makes America great
low priced stuff made in China. Maybe this person would want to research HOW
walmart maintains those low prices. Still another says this:"when the [walmart] workers are not creating anywhere near that kind of
value for others."Can you imagine? This person actually believes
this. These workers created multiple billions of dollars for many people, these
workers created huge fortunes, massive fortunes, for others. And this person
thinks they created nowhere near that kind of value for others. And
still others think the labor market is based on supply and demand. Nothing could
be further from the truth. There is ALWAYS a surplus of labor in any modern
economic system. There is NEVER more jobs then workers in a modern economic
system. For the vast majority of workers, when there is not a unified work
force, wages are determined by the company.
"The trouble with capitalism is capitalists; they're too ...
greedy." President Herbert Hoover, Republican President
In every system there will always be people at the bottom. The more corrupt the
government, the more people at the bottom. Socialist governments seem to have
more people at the bottom than capitalist governments. As our government is
becoming more socialist, we have seen the average family income drop. Same has
happened throughout Europe. Will we learn from this? I know some of
you won't, but hopefully the majority will.
Badger, what are you talking about? You throw around a couple of words,
socialist and capitalist, and you think that means something. These
issues are far more complex then just saying "as our government gets more
socialistic".Some of the greatest prosperity, for all, the world
has ever seen was in this country, right after welfare programs, and social
programs and strong federal planning had been implemented. And the top tax rate
was ninety percent. NINETY PERCENT. it was amazing what those programs did,
those socialist programs. But there have been people ever since that have been
doing everything they can to dismantle those great advancements. And they are
winning. Those socialist programs, Medicare, social security, etc are the legacy
that the greatest generation left us. And we have watched, and some have
abetted, while those that do not love this country and its promises, but love
only money and power, have done everything they can to tear it down. They have
Shaun: "How would you end poverty?"Well Shaun, I'm glad
you asked. Because I already have ended poverty; for myself. Yes I was once
poor. And no it was not fun. But nobody told me I had to stay that way. So I
worked my tail off, and now I'm not poor any more. I never asked any of
my employers to pay me more. I never wanted the government to force them to
either. Instead, I worked hard, improved my skills and my employers voluntarily
paid me more (or another one did).You see Shaun, the big Liberal lie
about poverty is that it is a permanent situation. But the truth is that
poverty is only beginning for most people. Those who remain poor, do it by
choice. There are countless numbers of refugees who come to this country with
absolutely nothing. And yet in a few short years, they have lifted themselves
out of poverty to a comfortable life style, the same way I did. And they do it
with less help and encouragement than their neighbors who are 2nd or 3rd
@Ronnie W.:"Wal-Mart is one the biggest government leeches there are.
They intentionally work people just less than the required time to be considered
a 'full-time' employee so they don't have to offer health
insurance. Many employees are forced to use WIC, food stamps and other
government assistance programs."That's not Wal-Mart's
fault. It's the fault of the government who makes the laws. All Wal-Mart
is doing is applying the laws as passed by Congress to do what companies are
created to do... maximize profits for owners (stockholders). And, of course,
who is it that passes the laws? Guys like Bernie Sanders.
@one old man:"Exactly why I DO NOT shop at Walmart."I
don't shop at Wal-Mart because almost everything in the store comes from
China."But Walmart is only one of countless predatory businesses
in America. McDonalds, Olive Garden, Poppa Johns... the list is almost
endless."So, I guess you won't be shopping anyplace then,
right?@Midwest Mom:"Walmart is proof that trickle down
doesn't work. The Waltons are so rich because they make a lot of money, but
don't distribute it among their workers."Wal-Mart
distributes profits to stockholders. If you work at Wal-Mart and want the
company to distribute to you, buy some Wal-Mart stock. That's how a
capitalist society works.@Flashback:"I don't shop at
Walmart because their products are substandard quality and everything comes from
China. Basically, Walmart funds the Chinese military."Actually,
Wal-Mart funds our national debt via China. So don't knock Wal-Mart...
without whom we may not be able to fund our government.@patriot:"This minimum wage increase is all about politics and nothing
more."True. He buying votes for upcoming elections... with
other peoples' money.
@netjes:"A Wal-Mart worker cannot find a better-paying job
anywhere."Wal-Mart pays competitive wages. In the oil producing
areas such as the Dakotas, Wal-Mart pays way more than in high unemployment
areas... in order to compete.
Harrison Bergeron, do you really believe that the poor want to be that way? I
know two people, identical skills, one makes twice as much as the other. Both
are hard workers. Should the person earning less keep quitting jobs until the
earn what the other one does? When quitting jobs becomes a habit, companies will
not hire you. You're over simplifying.90% of the companies I
worked for never gave me a raise for bettering my skills, or working harder.
They gave me a title and more responsibility instead. You can't eat a title
or more responsibility.
"the big Liberal lie about poverty is that it is a permanent
situation."No, poverty is a permanent situation. There has
always been poverty in the world. Most people that have ever lived have lived in
poverty. Need is ever present. Oh, I know, the individual if they work hard in
this country has a good opportunity to lift themselves up. But for many this
will never happen. Do people really pretend the workers at Walmart do not work
hard? I know, I know, then go work someplace else, get an education. But,
remember, not everybody is as clever as you. And sometimes, people really do
catch a bad break or two. I don't know what to think of your
statement that you have never asked for a raise. Good heavens, do you value
yourself so little? Of worship your lords, I mean employees, so much. "Those who remain poor, do it by choice"And here, my
friends, is the great conservative lie.
I have not seen a significant raise in over 15 years, I'm salary, and
now expected to work over 50 hours a week.America is going down the
toilet, and it is the greed of Corporations who are causing it.Either Government steps in to address it, orRevolutions will.[see American, French, Russian, etc.]I prefer the 1st option, because the 2nd one does not go over very nicely.
Slars: "... do you really believe that the poor want to be that way?"
Of course not! When I was poor, I didn't want to be. That was
why I chose to do something about it. But there are also those who are poor and
wish they were rich, but are not willing to do something about it. If refugees
can come to this country speaking a foreign language with only the clothes they
are wearing, no marketable skills, no education and achieve an upper middle
class lifestyle, then why should anyone be consigned to permanent poverty?
mark: "No, poverty is a permanent situation. There has always been poverty
in the world."Yes, like children are a permanent situation.
There will always be "poverty" in that sense because we will always
describe the bottom wage earners as the "poor." But not individually
(and we are talking about America, not the rest of the world). mark: "Do people really pretend the workers at Wal-Mart do not work
hard?"I don't. I worked much harder when I was poor, than
I do now. But I did not have the skills and education I do now. Nobody expects
someone to work at Wal-Mart for life. And everyone who works at Wal-Mart is
there by choice. There's no forced conscription at Wal-Mart. There are no
indentured servants. Everyone asked for the job and agreed to the wages.
Every employee is free to leave for a better offer as I'm sure many do.
But what a great place to get some work experience, learn retail or customer
service and get paid while you improve your education or marketable skills.
"Nobody expects someone to work at Wal-Mart for life. And everyone who works
at Wal-Mart is there by choice. There's no forced conscription at Wal-Mart.
There are no indentured servants. Everyone asked for the job and agreed to the
wages. Every employee is free to leave for a better offer as I'm sure many
do. But what a great place to get some work experience, learn retail or customer
service and get paid while you improve your education or marketable
HarrisonYour "immigrant" analogy is a classic straw man. A
more apropos analogy for that group is "pioneer". We celebrate
(rightfully so) the victory of the survivor under harsh conditions. You may, on
rare occasions, get the story of those who perished on the journey.
They're the forgotten (unlucky) ones. The common thread about all of them
was that they were trying to make a better life for their posterity. I doubt
many of them envisioned shangri-la.The point is this: If
you're going to throw out "Horatio Alger" as a template, you'd
better be sure the utility of the copies is as effective. That means everyone
one willing to work hard and sacrifice (education is a trade off) should be
entitled to the good life ... whatever that is. The real world says otherwise,
but true pioneers would be willing to share one another's burdens - and
fate - be it good or bad. Testimonial (yours included) is the most insidious
form of propaganda there is. Not everyone who tries makes it. But it's
hard to convince folks who live in the MLM capital of the world of that truth.
As bernie said, wal-mart is a wealthy company. Yet, they don't raise wages
and salaries more than "market price". The market price of a worker has
stagnated. Its not going up and it certainly hasn't kept pace with
inflation over the last 50 years. These companies and a lot of other
corporations are not generous with their earnings. And THAT is what constitute
greed. Greed is destroying america from the top down. There is a difference
between greedy capitalism and GENEROUS capitalism; the latter where a company
raises wages/salaries as their income and success grows. It seems though,
success to the 1% means giving the residual to their top execs. Which would be
why their income has grown and the general population is relatively stagnant due
to inflation and lack of income increases. You won't ever see a 1%'er
admit this though. they're too busy thinking that they can get away with
starving their minions while they have massive wine-cellars, 100 ft yachts and a
half dozen homes around the world. Mega-multi-millionaires and billionaires
especially need to be regarded for who they REALLY are. Greedy. $100 million
plus net worth and they keep compensating themselves?
@Ex-PatCase StudyFrom 1978 until the mid 80's about 2
million Vietnamese fled communist re-education camps in small boats. More than
a half million of these "boat people" ended up in the US. They came
speaking a foreign language with the clothes they were wearing and very little
else. Despite language barriers and war prejudices, they worked hard
and lifted themselves out of poverty. According to census data, their economic
status has improved dramatically. By 1989 only 34% were still below the poverty
line. By 1999, the percentage had dropped to only 16%. The
majority are now small business owners and employ others. They practically own
the fishing industry in New Orleans; a place where, coincidentally, we were
told during Katrina that government welfare was the only solution to perpetual
poverty. I guess the Vietnamese did not get the memo.