Wal Mart Vs. the Morons...

[rsc2a]

Cheap is a relative term.  I could buy a new camaro, loaded for $5k in 1969.  I also wouldn't hire a doctor that offered me Lasik eye surgery for $39 an eye.

 

[Smellin Coffee]

Pay the burger flipper $10.10/hr and your value meal goes up to $12.

And I would be fine with that. Stinking dollar menus only encourage low wages and larger waistlines anyway. Pay a fair wage and naturally the product will take a hit. If this was across the board things would iron out.

You missed the point.  Your burger costs more.  Your groceries cost more.  Your clothes cost more.  Your house costs more.  Your car costs more.  Your plumber costs more.  Your...

In short,  nothing has changed,  well except that America is even less competitive in the global marketplace.

You hit the nail on the head rsc2a

You'd have to change just about everything to make the economy work properly.  Here are just a few of my suggestions (and many of the have to be done simultaneously, or else they'd just make things worse). 

1.  Eliminate the income tax.  Substitute a national sales or consumption tax (NOT a VAT tax, though). 
2.  Eliminate the minimum wage entirely.  If the employer offers too little, don't take the job. 
3.  Eliminate employer-based cover-everything health insurance, which drives up the cost of all aspects of health care.  Catastrophic care insurance would be very affordable.  Pay for your own meds, doctors and procedures and let competition determine the price.  Make the loser pay lawyer/court costs in malpractice suits to minimize frivolous malpractice suits (tort reform). 
4.  Stop over-regulation.  Let the buyer beware. 
5.  And so on...

Though I do agree with most of this, I agree with #4 concering the "over" part. However, there ARE those (like the elderly, sickly, uneducated) who will get nailed by shady insurance providers. Happens in mortgage lending and it should be eliminated.

Had an elderly relative refinance his house. The refinance was for $148K. When he eventually sold the house, he owed the mortgage company almost $220K because he was bilked by an agent of the lender (Quicken Loans). I happened to look at his amortization chart in his paperwork after his sale and the principle increased $250 per month for the first 15 years of the loan then majorly decreased month after month. Not sure what kind of "loan" this was as I am not a loan expert. Anyway, he was bilked and the lawyer said he was out of luck because it was legit.

Unregulated health reform would be easy ammo to bilk out the sick and elderly.

Can't have stuff like

 

[Bruh]

Might as well make minimum wage $100/hr if you want to ignore the effects of wage inflation.

I think the real issue is people being underpaid and desperate. An individual company choosing to pay people better really has nothing to do with minimum wage, but taking responsibility for those they need. You can pay a cashier $8.50 or $16.50 .... but in the end, what value do you place on them? If you value them little, don't mind paying them little, and figure they are too stupid to better themselves and find higher paying jobs - fine, be that way. BUT! The higher moral ground would be to pay more, build trust, and take an active role in each individuals life. Might not make the CEO rich, but certainly will make him less of a SOB and more of a role model respected by many.

Pwaaahhaaaahaaa!!!!!!  What world do you live in.  The older I get the more I am reminded that we live in a very cruel and hateful world.  I see it everyday and it is very sad. 

 

[Tim]

Might as well make minimum wage $100/hr if you want to ignore the effects of wage inflation.

I think the real issue is people being underpaid and desperate. An individual company choosing to pay people better really has nothing to do with minimum wage, but taking responsibility for those they need. You can pay a cashier $8.50 or $16.50 .... but in the end, what value do you place on them? If you value them little, don't mind paying them little, and figure they are too stupid to better themselves and find higher paying jobs - fine, be that way. BUT! The higher moral ground would be to pay more, build trust, and take an active role in each individuals life. Might not make the CEO rich, but certainly will make him less of a SOB and more of a role model respected by many.

Pwaaahhaaaahaaa!!!!!!  What world do you live in.  The older I get the more I am reminded that we live in a very cruel and hateful world.  I see it everyday and it is very sad.

But those of faith have a higher standard. Yes, we are in a dog-eat-dog world. But, this isn't how it should be. If I was running a business I wouldn't pay my people peanuts. Yes, some might take advantage of me, and this is where fair employee management comes in. But, the way I see it, the people who work for me are here to make my dreams a reality - the least I can do is help them with their dreams.

 

[BandGuy]

BIG PROBLEM! WALMART PUTS THE LITTLE AMERICAN GUY OUT OF BUSINESS AND PAYS EMPLOYEES PEANUTS.

This is actually not a problem at all.  The majority of employees are either teenagers trying to make some extra money to put gas in the car their parents bought them or senior adults like my mother in law who are supplementing the retirement and who enjoy working and getting out of the house and being around people.  Very few people with a brain go to Wal Mart on the regular employee level hoping to make a long term career where they can make a living and raise a family, and if they do, then they are a bunch of stupid idiots for thinking so.

 

[BandGuy]

BIG PROBLEM! WALMART PUTS THE LITTLE AMERICAN GUY OUT OF BUSINESS AND PAYS EMPLOYEES PEANUTS.

So should the government intervene and limit their profits in favor of the small business?

Absolutely not.  They should stick to our national defense and getting out of the way of business.  They have already proven, IMO, that they are not very interested in higher wages (NAFTA and amnesty).  If they did, they would not constantly be sending our jobs overseas to the lowest bidder and trying to undermine the American workforce.

 

[BandGuy]

BIG PROBLEM! WALMART PUTS THE LITTLE AMERICAN GUY OUT OF BUSINESS AND PAYS EMPLOYEES PEANUTS.

So should the government intervene and limit their profits in favor of the small business?

Good question. Limit profits, probably not. But, maybe the little guy needs some assistance to be more competitive and die fighting. I believe the real issue is the mindset of the consumer, the convenience, and the aggressiveness of Walmart. This goes for Amazon and other big companies also. They know full well they are hurting the little guy, but the consumer also knows shopping at their store will hurt the little guy as well.

The intervention I would suggest is low, or no, taxes for these small mom and pop businesses. Perhaps the owner can benefit from personal tax exclusion as a business owner. This, and a country wide "shop small and local" campaign focusing on the value would be nice. Perhaps the government could pay for their store rent, to help them and the local economy for more vacant buildings. This all sounds like a handout, but helping mom and pop sure is an ethical thing to do if you allow big brother (say Walmart) to grow.

That all said, perhaps the government should intervene and limit the cheap imports, low wages, and other crimes stores like Walmart commit. Hold them to a standard for their employees at least.

I suppose one could limit more where a Walmart can be built. And, regarding online merchants ... maybe enforcing sales tax is a good idea.

The only intervention the government should make is to cut taxes for everyone (big and small businesses and the consumers) and do away with all government subsidies.  Let the best win out and the worst go out of business.

 

[BandGuy]

BIG PROBLEM! WALMART PUTS THE LITTLE AMERICAN GUY OUT OF BUSINESS AND PAYS EMPLOYEES PEANUTS.

So should the government intervene and limit their profits in favor of the small business?

Good question. Limit profits, probably not. But, maybe the little guy needs some assistance to be more competitive and die fighting. I believe the real issue is the mindset of the consumer, the convenience, and the aggressiveness of Walmart. This goes for Amazon and other big companies also. They know full well they are hurting the little guy, but the consumer also knows shopping at their store will hurt the little guy as well.

The intervention I would suggest is low, or no, taxes for these small mom and pop businesses. Perhaps the owner can benefit from tax exclusion as a business owner. This, and a country wide "shop small and local" campaign focusing on the value would be nice.

That all said, perhaps the government should intervene and limit the cheap imports, low wages, and other crimes stores like Walmart commit. Hold them to a standard for their employees at least.

On a personal level, I agree with you. However, it goes against Republican values: every man for himself. If my small business gets eaten up by losing out my customer base to a more wealthy business, then I either didn't do something right, was too lazy to be competetive, and am getting what I deserve. That is the way with capitalism. I'm NOT saying socialism is a better choice by any means. What I am saying is that with a capitalistic form of government, given competition there will always be "losers". Survival of the fittest (or wealthiest)...

Well, we are actually learning with Commi Care that the same is true with the Socialist / Communist form of business.  There are definitely going to be a lot of losers with this travesty.  There might be a few winners and good for them.  But they have to realize that the source of their victory is the suffering of many others who have been hurt as a result of their gains.  The major difference, as I see it, is that in Capitalism, there are typically more winners and fewer losers.  Sorry, but that is just life.  There are always going to be winners and losers.  The question for us now is, will there be freedom or tyranny.  It appears that America is diving head first toward tyranny to me.

 

[BandGuy]

WalMart's profitability is artificially propped up by the government providing the services that the employees can't afford with the pay they receive. Most WalMart employees are eligible for Medicaid, housing assistance, food stamps, reduced school lunches. And yes, this includes those who are full time workers.

Right/wrong? idk but it isn't some brilliant business mind that says "hey let's build our business with indirect government subsidies for our workers keeping our payroll low". Corpfare anyone?

What should shelf stockers get paid?
How about people who collect up shopping carts?
What about they who sell the watches at the jewelry department?
What about the guy/gal who greets you at the door?
These are hardly skilled labor.
You could pay them all $12 an hour and they'd still be poor in today's economy.
With fuel, food and lodging prices the way they are, $12 and hour just aint making it.

Pay them $16.95 per hour .... with benefits. You wanna be the world leader in selling goods, fine, be also the world leader in treating your people fair.

That is an idiotic notion.  Those jobs are not worth $16.95, and even more than ever with the Obama economy, there are more people looking for jobs today than there are jobs available.  Again, if you are looking to make a career and support a family by being a door greeter or collecting shopping carts, something any 10 year old could do, then you are really, really stupid.

 

[BandGuy]

Might as well make minimum wage $100/hr if you want to ignore the effects of wage inflation.

I think the real issue is people being underpaid and desperate. An individual company choosing to pay people better really has nothing to do with minimum wage, but taking responsibility for those they need. You can pay a cashier $8.50 or $16.50 .... but in the end, what value do you place on them? If you value them little, don't mind paying them little, and figure they are too stupid to better themselves and find higher paying jobs - fine, be that way. BUT! The higher moral ground would be to pay more, build trust, and take an active role in each individuals life. Might not make the CEO rich, but certainly will make him less of a SOB and more of a role model respected by many.

And, it will most certainly lead to less jobs for other desperate people who would work for $5.00 an hour.  See?  Somebody's going to lose no matter which direction you go.

 

[Tim]

WalMart's profitability is artificially propped up by the government providing the services that the employees can't afford with the pay they receive. Most WalMart employees are eligible for Medicaid, housing assistance, food stamps, reduced school lunches. And yes, this includes those who are full time workers.

Right/wrong? idk but it isn't some brilliant business mind that says "hey let's build our business with indirect government subsidies for our workers keeping our payroll low". Corpfare anyone?

What should shelf stockers get paid?
How about people who collect up shopping carts?
What about they who sell the watches at the jewelry department?
What about the guy/gal who greets you at the door?
These are hardly skilled labor.
You could pay them all $12 an hour and they'd still be poor in today's economy.
With fuel, food and lodging prices the way they are, $12 and hour just aint making it.

Pay them $16.95 per hour .... with benefits. You wanna be the world leader in selling goods, fine, be also the world leader in treating your people fair.

That is an idiotic notion.  Those jobs are not worth $16.95, and even more than ever with the Obama economy, there are more people looking for jobs today than there are jobs available.  Again, if you are looking to make a career and support a family by being a door greeter or collecting shopping carts, something any 10 year old could do, then you are really, really stupid.

Other people who do not agree with your opinions are not stupid, just different. I agree that jobs vary on their value. But, I also believe people have a value.

 

[BandGuy]

Pay the burger flipper $10.10/hr and your value meal goes up to $12.

And I would be fine with that. Stinking dollar menus only encourage low wages and larger waistlines anyway. Pay a fair wage and naturally the product will take a hit. If this was across the board things would iron out.

I'm glad you would be willing to pay for that.  I'm not.  And I would be willing to bet that most people would not either.  I'm not going to pay more for a burger I can make at home, cheaper and better.  Then, the business goes out of business and all these people you feel so sorry for are out of a job.  See how this works?

 

[BandGuy]

Pay the burger flipper $10.10/hr and your value meal goes up to $12.

And I would be fine with that. Stinking dollar menus only encourage low wages and larger waistlines anyway. Pay a fair wage and naturally the product will take a hit. If this was across the board things would iron out.

You missed the point.  Your burger costs more.  Your groceries cost more.  Your clothes cost more.  Your house costs more.  Your car costs more.  Your plumber costs more.  Your...

In short,  nothing has changed,  well except that America is even less competitive in the global marketplace.

However the real world evolves and changes is far form my actual concern - I exist in it and do my best. BUT, I will say this ... In my opinion cheap products, service, and labor are hurtful to the economy. The whole "throw away" society is a crime. We should pay people well, sell quality products that last, and keep cheap imports out.

The only way your idea will work is to embrace more tyranny and Communism as is the case with Commi Care.  I don't think most Americans want that, but hey, I could be wrong.  I didn't think most Americans would really be stupid enough to believe that government provided health care would really be better and be free.  Guess I was wrong.

 

[sword]

You'd have to change just about everything to make the economy work properly.  Here are just a few of my suggestions (and many of the have to be done simultaneously, or else they'd just make things worse). 

1.  Eliminate the income tax.  Substitute a national sales or consumption tax (NOT a VAT tax, though). 
2.  Eliminate the minimum wage entirely.  If the employer offers too little, don't take the job. 
3.  Eliminate employer-based cover-everything health insurance, which drives up the cost of all aspects of health care.  Catastrophic care insurance would be very affordable.  Pay for your own meds, doctors and procedures and let competition determine the price.  Make the loser pay lawyer/court costs in malpractice suits to minimize frivolous malpractice suits (tort reform). 
4.  Stop over-regulation.  Let the buyer beware. 
5.  And so on...
[/quote]

Your points are not as easy as they sound.

1.  Eliminate the income tax.  Substitute a national sales or consumption tax (NOT a VAT tax, though). 

Since the rich pay most of the taxes your bright idea would shift most of the tax burden onto the poor & middle class.

Who Pays Income Taxes?
Who Pays Income Taxes and How Much?
Tax Year 2009
Percentiles Ranked by AGI AGI Threshold on Percentiles Percentage of Federal Personal Income Tax Paid
Top 1%                                                       $343,927             36.73
Top 5%                                                       $154,643             58.66
Top 10%                                                       $112,124             70.47
Top 25%                                                       $66,193             87.30
Top 50%                                                       $32,396             97.75
Bottom 50%                                                <$32,396             2.25
Note: AGI is Adjusted Gross Income
Source: Internal Revenue Service

Acording to FAIRTAX.ORG the fair tax would eliminate the income tax & replace it with a 25 to 30% sales tax.

If you make less than $60,000 a year you would clearly pay more with the fair tax. The richest 10% would save 100's of millions in taxes.

 

[BandGuy]

WalMart's profitability is artificially propped up by the government providing the services that the employees can't afford with the pay they receive. Most WalMart employees are eligible for Medicaid, housing assistance, food stamps, reduced school lunches. And yes, this includes those who are full time workers.

Right/wrong? idk but it isn't some brilliant business mind that says "hey let's build our business with indirect government subsidies for our workers keeping our payroll low". Corpfare anyone?

What should shelf stockers get paid?
How about people who collect up shopping carts?
What about they who sell the watches at the jewelry department?
What about the guy/gal who greets you at the door?
These are hardly skilled labor.
You could pay them all $12 an hour and they'd still be poor in today's economy.
With fuel, food and lodging prices the way they are, $12 and hour just aint making it.

Pay them $16.95 per hour .... with benefits. You wanna be the world leader in selling goods, fine, be also the world leader in treating your people fair.

That is an idiotic notion.  Those jobs are not worth $16.95, and even more than ever with the Obama economy, there are more people looking for jobs today than there are jobs available.  Again, if you are looking to make a career and support a family by being a door greeter or collecting shopping carts, something any 10 year old could do, then you are really, really stupid.

Other people who do not agree with your opinions are not stupid, just different. I agree that jobs vary on their value. But, I also believe people have a value.

Human value is found in their freedom, not in how much they are paid.  And yes, those who wish to make a decent living doing menial tasks that a 10 year old could do are incredibly stupid.

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

The richest 10% would save 100's of millions in taxes.

No they wouldn't.  They buy more stuff, and more expensive stuff, and none of the tax on it is deductible.  As it is now, they pay a fraction of what they should pay because they can afford the best tax lawyers. 

 

[rsc2a]

Yup. A thirty percent tax on a twenty million dollar house it's a good chunk of coin.

 

[sword]

You'd have to change just about everything to make the economy work properly.  Here are just a few of my suggestions (and many of the have to be done simultaneously, or else they'd just make things worse). 

1.  Eliminate the income tax.  Substitute a national sales or consumption tax (NOT a VAT tax, though). 
2.  Eliminate the minimum wage entirely.  If the employer offers too little, don't take the job. 
3.  Eliminate employer-based cover-everything health insurance, which drives up the cost of all aspects of health care.  Catastrophic care insurance would be very affordable.  Pay for your own meds, doctors and procedures and let competition determine the price.  Make the loser pay lawyer/court costs in malpractice suits to minimize frivolous malpractice suits (tort reform). 
4.  Stop over-regulation.  Let the buyer beware. 
5.  And so on...
[/quote]

2.  Eliminate the minimum wage entirely.  If the employer offers too little, don't take the job. 


Many companies are outsourcing work from Mexico to central America & asia because of the excessive $3.00 per hr average wage in mexico. Corporations would pay significantly less than $8.00 an hour if the government would allow it. Ask wait staff in restraunts (exempt from min. wage) what they earn per hour before tips. 

Chart below shows average monthly wage by country. I pay more in property taxes than 1/3 of the worlds population earns per year.

Rank     Country Average monthly Wage (USD)
1 Luxembourg 4,089
2 Norway                 3,678
3 Austria                 3,437
4 United States 3,263
5 United Kingdom 3,065
10 Korea (Republic of) 2,903
11 France                 2,886
12 Canada                 2,724
13 Germany                 2,720
14 Singapore 2,616
15 Australia                 2,610
17 Japan                 2,522
18 Italy                 2,445
30 Hong Kong (China) 1,545
33 Hungary                 1,374
45 Malaysia                   961
49 Panama                   831
51 Brazil                   778
55 Colombia                   692
56 Ukraine                   686
57 China                   656
58 Mexico                   609
61 Egypt                   548
62 Thailand                   489
64 Dominican Republic   462
69 India                   295
70 Philippines   279
71 Pakistan                   255
72 Tajikistan                   227

 

[sword]

Yup. A thirty percent tax on a twenty million dollar house it's a good chunk of coin.

I have never seen a flat tax proposal from any credible source that included real estate as a taxable item.

 

[rsc2a]

Yup. A thirty percent tax on a twenty million dollar house it's a good chunk of coin.

I have never seen a flat tax proposal from any credible source that included real estate as a taxable item.

The "FairTax" group isn't credible?