Walmart employee Thanksgiving donations at Canton store cause controversy

[Mickey_Finn]

I really don’t have a problem with $10/hour. But I would like to see it implemented in stages (maybe a 50 cent per year increase) and a “learning wage” for workers under 25 that is lower. I DO have a problem with people who want wages to START at $18 and hour. That’s economic suicide.

That’s one of the problems with these drastic propositions. If an employer goes out of business or has to cut his workforce, lots of people suffer.

I think the workers are too far behind for such gradual increases. As for a learning wage. Employers will simply hire younger workers, and leave older ones out in the cold. The concept of equal pay for equal work has indisputable merit.

I realise that these steps may well cause a business to close it’s doors. But thats just business.

Somebody showed concern for the workers who may loose their employment. We all hope that they find employment with a more suitable organization.

ATB

 

[Mickey_Finn]

One of the effects of a higher minimum wage would be more self-service checkouts and fewer jobs. Walmart, Kroger, and Meijer have already added a lot of them here. There are a lot of other that industries would accelerate automation if wages are too high. Companies would also be more picky in who they hire at the minimum wage. Low skilled and under educated people who need more supervision would not get jobs at all. Is that what you want for people at the bottom–to deny them the starting job they need to acquire job skills?

At this point what you raise as concern is meerly speculation. Lets give it a go, and see how well it works.

ATB

 

[Country_Gal]

The Church calls for a just and fair living wage, which is defined by allowing a man to support himself and his family frugally. And that if such a wage cannot be supplied, then there is something seriously wrong with the current system in place, and social justice demands that change is effected.

I’m not saying a 16 year old kid should get $15 an hour for a part time shift in Walmart and nor is the Church. Nor am I saying a fair and living wage constitutes allowing a all the kids to have the most recent iPhone release.

I agree. We should send the poor to some prosperous country where they can do better!

Oh wait, they’re all clamoring to come here! Well, I’ll be darned!

 

[Corki]

I think the workers are too far behind for such gradual increases. As for a learning wage. Employers will simply hire younger workers, and leave older ones out in the cold. The concept of equal pay for equal work has indisputable merit.

I realise that these steps may well cause a business to close it’s doors. But thats just business.

Somebody showed concern for the workers who may loose their employment. We all hope that they find employment with a more suitable organization.

ATB

Gradual increases gives employers at least a chance to absorb some and find some in efficiencies. Drastic increases will have drastic consequences. Good businesses don’t just have an economic plan for next year but for 5, 10 or even 20 years with capital investments, growth plans, etc.

No country in the history of the world has survived without a strong middle class. The backbone of the middle class is small business. It is not a Christian attitude to accept higher unemployment and more businesses being forced to close just so those earning the minimum wage can afford to live comfortably.

If large business, like Walmart are driven out of business, it won’t be other companies that pick up the slack. More work will go overseas and more businesses like Amazon which have fewer employees and fewer locations will fill the retail void. So, that “more suitable” organization is not likely to be in the same state or even the same country.

 

[Corki]

At this point what you raise as concern is meerly speculation. Lets give it a go, and see how well it works.

ATB

It’s not speculation. There is clear precedent. The birth of the self-service lanes at grocery stores came out the labor movement into grocery chains. Checkers were more expensive with a union involved so stores needed to operate with fewer checkers.

As for the second point, you can look at banking as a historical example. Tellers used to be high school grads with some good math skills. Banking regulations forced banks to be leaner, more work is done at the branch level that used to be done is operations centers and the teller job became more of a multi-task position. Now it’s rare to find a bank that hires tellers without a college degree.

 

[Ridgerunner]

The thing most likely to improve wages is full employment. To attain that, it will be necessary for the government to discontinue doing things that impede employment, and do those few things it actually can do to encourage employment.

Right now, though, I see little chance of that in the near future.
-The administration and its party are totally committed to job-killing Obamacare.
-The administration is intentionally destroying the coal industry.
-The administration won’t approve the Keystone pipeline.
-The administration impedes development of petroleum resources here (while loaning taxpayer money to develop it in Brazil.
-The administration constantly promotes tax increases, and has implemented some.
-The administration still wants to increase government spending, raising deficits and fears of inflationary pressures in the future, which discourages business expansion.

So, we can talk all we want about raising minimum wages and forcing Walmart to do this or that, but the reality is that having plentiful jobs is the best plan for getting wages up. After all, people do take the Walmart jobs and other jobs, which they wouldn’t do if they had better alternatives.

Of course, full employment will result in inflationary pressures, but we’re going to face those pressures sooner or later anyway, and the longer the government’s policy is “low interest rates + low employment” goes on, the worse it will be.

 

[Mickey_Finn]

You do realize, do you not, that people, including laborers, live on their “profit”? It costs me to work. I have to have the right clothes. I have to have reliable transportation. I have to have fuel for my car. I might have to have the right tools, and so on. And the government taxes me to spend on whatever it wants to spend money on.

What’s left is my “profit” after those things, and that’s what I, and everybody else, lives on.

I’ve always considered my “profits” to be my savings such as they are. All that other stuff are viewed as expenses.

 

[Mickey_Finn]

They already do that, to a certain extent. Government subsidies for agriculture do tend to control prices for many food products - it’s why corn is cheap and hence, why high fructose corn syrup replaced sugar in many products. You can go round and round debating the economics and ethics of that as well, but it would drag us far afield of the whole living wage conundrum.

We seem to be going in the same circle here, with some wanting to raise wages, and others pointing out it will raise prices. And it will. I try to shop at stores which treat its employees better and buy products from companies that do the same - and yes, it costs more money. It’s a personal calculus. If you truly wish to implement change, put your money where your mouth is and don’t shop at Walmart. Advocating for change while still purchasing from the company you’re trying to change solves nothing. Money talks. Companies will adapt if consumers make it clear with their purchases that certain behavior will not induce them to spend.

I do the same thing with meat. I have a big problem with the factory farming system in America. So I buy local, from a farmer where I know that the animals were treated well and fed properly, without tons of antibiotics dumped into their feed. Yes, meat is far more expensive, so I buy less of it, or cheaper cuts, and return to peasant style cooking. I eat a lot more lentils and beans to take the place of meat. It’s the only way things will change. It’s the same concept - factory farms will not change if you keep buying their product. Take away the money stream and they become far more receptive to courting consumers again.

Good for you!

 

[Mickey_Finn]

Non sequitur

Not at all.

 

[Mickey_Finn]

We live in a free market society, the best method of allocating limited resources. It may not be perfect, bit it has worked better than communism and socialism.

Walmart is in the business of making money. There is nothing wrong with that. I work to make money same as Walmart.

Not a true free market by any stretch.

 

[Mickey_Finn]

It’s not speculation. There is clear precedent. The birth of the self-service lanes at grocery stores came out the labor movement into grocery chains. Checkers were more expensive with a union involved so stores needed to operate with fewer checkers.

As for the second point, you can look at banking as a historical example. Tellers used to be high school grads with some good math skills. Banking regulations forced banks to be leaner, more work is done at the branch level that used to be done is operations centers and the teller job became more of a multi-task position. Now it’s rare to find a bank that hires tellers without a college degree.

1. Our grocery stores were orgainized a long time ago. Self check out is a fairly recent occurance.
2. I’ve been seeing the same teller for over 30 years. I’ll ask her about here education tomorrow when I see her.

ATB

 

[Dawnia]

I agree. We should send the poor to some prosperous country where they can do better!

Oh wait, they’re all clamoring to come here! Well, I’ll be darned!

Exactly! What we have here people is a 1st world problem. Most of what we consider necessities are really just conveniences. You can survive without most of what we think we need. Cars, electricity, water coming into our homes, flush toilets, phones, tvs, washers and driers, microwaves and this list goes on and on. Minimum wage here provides a far greater standard of living than the minimum subsistence level required by the Church’s “fair wage” teaching.

Contract writers in the states frequently complain that companies pay less than $10 for projects. A writer from another country (can’t remember which one) was asked what that $10 dollars would buy him. He replied a week of groceries. The guy who gets a week of groceries certainly thinks that $10 is a fair wage.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I do the same thing with meat. I have a big problem with the factory farming system in America. So I buy local, from a farmer where I know that the animals were treated well and fed properly, without tons of antibiotics dumped into their feed. Yes, meat is far more expensive, so I buy less of it, or cheaper cuts, and return to peasant style cooking. I eat a lot more lentils and beans to take the place of meat. It’s the only way things will change. It’s the same concept - factory farms will not change if you keep buying their product. Take away the money stream and they become far more receptive to courting consumers again.

People who condemn “factory farming” usually fit within one of two categories:

1. Activists who make inflamatory and usually grotesquely inaccurate films.
2. People who have never seen a “factory farm”, and believe the people in Category 1.

I have been in “factory farm” facilities for poultry and hogs, and on the whole I would say they’re generally cleaner and more humane than those of most “Old MacDonald” type farms. Now, I understand in some places, and from time to time it’s different, but I have never seen any of those. Generally speaking, though, bad conditions on a farm of any sort guarantees that the grower will lose money.

“Factory farms” are mostly “family farms”. Their facilities are just a lot bigger than we usually imagine them to be. But the conditions are actually pretty good.

I will say that I do not favor either confinement raising of cattle (mostly an irrigated land thing, and not very common) or even commercial feed lots. It isn’t necessary to feed grain to “feeder cattle”. It just takes longer to raise them to slaughter weight and condition on grass alone, but not by a whole lot. And grass fed usually don’t have that excessive intramuscular fat.

 

[ffg]

Facilitating a process to allow for volunteering time or money to help those in need is not a ‘bad’.

Sure it might look odd if the facilitator is an employer, and those in need are the employees. But, as the employer the facilitator can implement logistics timely, as in this case.

The irony is people who think pay is too low, still want their 98 cent products and would complain ( or vote with their feet and go elsewhere) when prices increased to cover higher pay.

 

[DeniseNY]

The irony is people who think pay is too low, still want their 98 cent products and would complain ( or vote with their feet and go elsewhere) when prices increased to cover higher pay.

They also ignore that Wal Mart provides items from A - Z at low prices, allowing those with fixed or lower incomes to purchase practically everything they need for their homes and families at super low prices.

 

[Trader]

At this point what you raise as concern is meerly speculation. Lets give it a go, and see how well it works.

ATB

Go ahead with your idea. Start a company with your own money at risk, pay employees with few skills as much as you can, and serve the needs of your customers. Sam Walton did that in a single lifetime. Many of his early employees became millionaires and he became one of the world’s wealthiest men and one of the greatest philanthropists.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

The irony is people who think pay is too low, still want their 98 cent products and would complain ( or vote with their feet and go elsewhere) when prices increased to cover higher pay.

Not necessarily, and there have been many examples on this thread alone of people who are willing to pay the higher prices at establishments that pay their employees better. I have never been a big fan of low-cost items because usually they are also low quality - thinking housewares, clothing, etc.

When my children were little, I found that church swaps and thrift stores were much better sources for nice-quality, low cost clothing and other items for them. Now that we are mostly all adults, paying a bit more for a higher-quality item that will last makes much more sense.

We are a very consumer-oriented society which wants to always have more stuff and the latest stuff. Perhaps if we all weren’t buying so much there wouldn’t be as much pressure to have super low-cost outlets.

Food of course is a separate topic. Even there though, portion sizes are out of control. It is also now very difficult for most people to have even a small garder, let alone a laying chicken or two. Even in small towns, there are often ordinances about growing vegtables in the yard. And in cities, you hear about garden projects, but they aren’t as common as the news would like to make them out to be.

 

[PeopleB4Things]

We live in a free market society, the best method of allocating limited resources. It may not be perfect, bit it has worked better than communism and socialism.

Walmart is in the business of making money. There is nothing wrong with that. I work to make money same as Walmart.

We are not a totally free market society. Ask any republican.

 

[alexandratm]

People who condemn “factory farming” usually fit within one of two categories:

1. Activists who make inflamatory and usually grotesquely inaccurate films.
2. People who have never seen a “factory farm”, and believe the people in Category 1.

I have been in “factory farm” facilities for poultry and hogs, and on the whole I would say they’re generally cleaner and more humane than those of most “Old MacDonald” type farms. Now, I understand in some places, and from time to time it’s different, but I have never seen any of those. Generally speaking, though, bad conditions on a farm of any sort guarantees that the grower will lose money.

“Factory farms” are mostly “family farms”. Their facilities are just a lot bigger than we usually imagine them to be. But the conditions are actually pretty good.

I will say that I do not favor either confinement raising of cattle (mostly an irrigated land thing, and not very common) or even commercial feed lots. It isn’t necessary to feed grain to “feeder cattle”. It just takes longer to raise them to slaughter weight and condition on grass alone, but not by a whole lot. And grass fed usually don’t have that excessive intramuscular fat.

I define factory farms as confinement/commercial feed lots for cattle, where the confinement is excessive and causes higher percentages of illnesses, thus facilitating the need for antibiotics in the feed. As for chickens, I know that some confinement is actually more sanitary - but I prefer to get my eggs from a few farmers that let their chickens pasture somewhat, due to the better quality eggs. I tend to look to Joel Salatin and his cohorts. Industrialization is not inherently bad, but I have a problem when the conditions are such that we’re dumping bags of antibiotics into the feed and thus reducing the efficacy of the drugs, and the feed is so poor we’re reducing nutritional value. I’m not expecting bucolic pastureland. Merely common sense.

But this really isn’t the thread for all of this - I was merely making a point that if you have convictions about how things should be done, your purchases should align with those convictions, rather than simply making pronouncements from your pulpit. Put your money where your mouth is, as they say.

 

[PeopleB4Things]

Another thing people forget is that people who make money pay the taxes that go into the government programs that help people who don’t pay taxes.

Hmmm… interesting idea. Since we all pay taxes maybe we can get the govt to pay our share of our bills. Walmart “enables” its employees to qualify for food stamps and other welfare services. Many of their employees are also exempt from paying federal taxes. Walmart does pay taxes (in essence paying toward those services used by its employees). But we must admit that taxes aren’t levied to back fill financial voids left by greedy businesses. These taxes are supposed to pay for social security, the FAA, the CDC, NIH, the military, etc. If Walmart can rely on the government to supplement its employees because it pays for these services anyway, through its tax dollars, then we all might as well go on government welfare services. We, like Walmart, are paying for these services and we, like Walmart, should take advantages of the services we pay for immediately.

One last thought. What is Walmart’s real effective rate when you subtract out their tax dollars used for welfare services for their employees?

Also, Walmart only pays a lot in taxes because it make a ton of money in profits. It paid in 2010 an effective rate of 32% on unprotected income. It’s the same rate I paid and I don’t make even a millionth of what Walmart made… and the only protected income I have is what little I put away in my 401K. It’s not like we’re asking any more of Walmart than we ask of ourselves. Maybe if Walmart paid its employees enough to get them off of social services and enough to pay taxes themselves, Walmart (and the rest of us) wouldn’t have to pay so much in taxes.