Page 104 of 154 FirstFirst ... 45494102103104105106114 ... LastLast
Results 1,031 to 1,040 of 1532

Thread: Walmart workers demand better wages

  1. #1031
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,322

    Re: Walmart workers demand better wages

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    J, it is never profitable to dance with silliness. I've tried to tell you that before.
    I'm not here for your confessions, maybe you should try honest conversation instead of the silliness...

    When you say something that means something, that has a real and honest point, I'd love to have a debate with you.
    Tell me where you think the analogy is wrong and we can start there....
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  2. #1032
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Walmart workers demand better wages

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    I'm not here for your confessions, maybe you should try honest conversation instead of the silliness...



    Tell me where you think the analogy is wrong and we can start there....
    J, I not calling people thugs. I don't fight strawmen and battle with fascist conservatives.

    Negotiating is not thuggery. Striking is not thuggery. When business used to send people to break legs of those trying to start a union that was thuggery. Don't be so hyperbolic. Just state clearly you think management should hold all the power. That's a fair stance. Some won't agree of course, but they can do without calling you a name.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  3. #1033
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,866
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Walmart workers demand better wages

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    J, I not calling people thugs. I don't fight strawmen and battle with fascist conservatives.

    Negotiating is not thuggery. Striking is not thuggery. When business used to send people to break legs of those trying to start a union that was thuggery. Don't be so hyperbolic. Just state clearly you think management should hold all the power. That's a fair stance. Some won't agree of course, but they can do without calling you a name.
    Striking may not be thuggery. But it IS extortion. It uses the threat of force and actual force and costs the company money and those that strike won't quit striking unless they get what they want. The very definition of extortion. Only this extortion is legal if you go by the law.

    As far as pay goes, yes, the company SHOULD have all the power. It is thier money. The only part of it that is the employee's is the amount that they agreed to when they were hired.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  4. #1034
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Walmart workers demand better wages

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Striking may not be thuggery. But it IS extortion. It uses the threat of force and actual force and costs the company money and those that strike won't quit striking unless they get what they want. The very definition of extortion. Only this extortion is legal if you go by the law.

    As far as pay goes, yes, the company SHOULD have all the power. It is thier money. The only part of it that is the employee's is the amount that they agreed to when they were hired.
    No, it's a time honored practice of negotiation. Just as are lock outs and other ways in which both sides put pressure on the other.

    And it is the worker's labor. They strike a deal, a negotiation. An employer will most always pay less than he should if he can get away with. And a employee will always want more than he should if he can get away with. It is better for both if they negotiate in good faith, and be less adversarial and more as partners. They need each other.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  5. #1035
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,322

    Re: Walmart workers demand better wages

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    J, I not calling people thugs. I don't fight strawmen and battle with fascist conservatives.
    Oh, so I am a 'fascist conservative' eh? Weak Joe, real weak.

    Negotiating is not thuggery. Striking is not thuggery. When business used to send people to break legs of those trying to start a union that was thuggery. Don't be so hyperbolic.
    That is purely laughable Joe...You have to go all the way back 100 + years to come up with your hyperbole, and then blame me as being hyperbolic....Unions use strikes as threat toward business, and in the modern times we live in safety, and other concerns that made unions necessary in the beginning have given way to basically extortion for more and more pay, and pensions that they know full well could never be sustained. That is a mobster tactic all the way.

    Just state clearly you think management should hold all the power. That's a fair stance. Some won't agree of course, but they can do without calling you a name.
    Why? You couldn't in this very post. Anyway, I don't think that Unions couldn't serve a purpose in today's world, maybe not in the US, but surely in other parts of the world. But the problem is that they get greedy, and couldn't care less if the business lasts for the long run.
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  6. #1036
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-15-17 @ 11:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,647

    Re: Walmart workers demand better wages

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    No, it's a time honored practice of negotiation. Just as are lock outs and other ways in which both sides put pressure on the other.
    Nuclear missiles and Nuclear armed stealth bombers have been a good negotiating tool also, still doesn't make it a good way to go.

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    And it is the worker's labor. They strike a deal, a negotiation. An employer will most always pay less than he should if he can get away with. And a employee will always want more than he should if he can get away with. It is better for both if they negotiate in good faith, and be less adversarial and more as partners. They need each other.
    It is only the "worker's labor" if the company feels like paying the worker for that labor, otherwise, it's the workers time in the unemployment line and the person that accepts what is offered by the company has a job.

    A company never pays less than it "should". It should only have to pay the amount necessary to get and keep a quality worker, and only to quality workers, based upon skill level needed, skill availability in the labor market, training required to attain the needed skill and the economic needs/desires of the company.

    Labor is a competitive market. Each person is their own product they are trying to sell. The company, just like individuals do, shops for the best deal available for their needs/wants. If worker A is too expensive, then they hire worker applicant b, etc. If the price for worker applicant B is acceptable but quality of the applicant, then they move on to worker applicant C. Just like a company has to balance the cost and the quality of it's products to compete in a market, a potential worker also has to do so. It is incumbent upon the individual applying and seeking employment to meet the requirements to be employed, they company does not have change it's requirements unless it is unable to meet it's needs.

    Unions are like a third party stepping in as saying that all products must have a minimum price to be purchased. How would you like it someone made it so that all food items must cost $5 minimum, regardless of quality? Wouldn't work for a product, doesn't work for labor because labor IS a product being marketed.

    Frankly, companies should be able to fire striking workers. They were hired to do a job, they are not doing it, so fire them and hire someone else. Besides making labor cost more, Unions and a lot of Labor protection laws force companies into retaining extra, costly and non/low productive labor.

    And all of those costs are passed on to consumers. In the end, a Union forces higher labor costs in one segment thus raising the cost of product A, workers needing or wanting to by product A must now make more money to afford that product, so the workers that make product B and C now want a raise also, so they force an increase in their labor cost, thus raising the cost for products B and C. Since the labor producing product A wanted the raise to afford more or better products B and C, even though they got the raise, they still cannot afford more or better products B and C because those laborers also got a raise. And so the cycle begins again, except for labor producing product X who was satisfied with their pay and benefits but products A, B and C now cost them more. Eventually, those producing product X will also have to have a raise or they cannot purchase the desired/needed levels of products A, B and C. If products A, B and C are necessities and product X is a luxury, eventually, product X will disappear because it is no longer affordable to the laborers making products A, B and C and the workers producing it now become unemployed.

    How is this constant cycle of inflation good?
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

  7. #1037
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,866
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Walmart workers demand better wages

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    No, it's a time honored practice of negotiation. Just as are lock outs and other ways in which both sides put pressure on the other.
    It is not negotiation. Negotian means a give and take. Where one party offers something and the other side either agree's or comes up with a counter offer. That does not happen in a strike. Ever. Its whole purpose is to cause the company money until they give into a demand. Go look up the definition of of the words "strike" (as applied to a company), negotiation, and extortion. The definition of extortion will apply far more than negotiation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    And it is the worker's labor. They strike a deal, a negotiation. An employer will most always pay less than he should if he can get away with. And a employee will always want more than he should if he can get away with. It is better for both if they negotiate in good faith, and be less adversarial and more as partners. They need each other.
    Bold: Yes it is the workers labor. But it is the owners company. And the company has a right to hire who they want and set the price that he/she is willing to pay for the labor involved. If the worker doesn't like it then there are other jobs out there. May not be the jobs that they want...but that is not the companies problem.

    Underlined: If this were true then why doesn't Wal-Mart pay $7.25 an hour? They are not unionized so have no pressure to pay more than minimum wage from a union. So what keeps them paying more than minimum wage? Why doesn't my company pay minimum wage? All I do is take messages over a phone. Yet both companies pay at least 2 dollars above minimum wage. Indeed why don't all companies that are not unionized pay minimum wage? Now I'm not saying that companies won't pay the minimum that they can get away with. But it is not near as bad as your statement leads it to be.

    Red: This is the truth.

    Blue: A better phrasing perhaps would be that the companies and the workers should be more human and less greedy to each other.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  8. #1038
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Walmart workers demand better wages

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    Oh, so I am a 'fascist conservative' eh? Weak Joe, real weak.
    If that is what you took away, you're having issue I likely can't help with here. No where do I say that. :rolls:

    That is purely laughable Joe...You have to go all the way back 100 + years to come up with your hyperbole, and then blame me as being hyperbolic....Unions use strikes as threat toward business, and in the modern times we live in safety, and other concerns that made unions necessary in the beginning have given way to basically extortion for more and more pay, and pensions that they know full well could never be sustained. That is a mobster tactic all the way.
    Again, a compehrension issue. No where am I claiming anything like is goign on today. I see no thuggery anywhere. I merely wanted to show you want it looks like.

    Why? You couldn't in this very post. Anyway, I don't think that Unions couldn't serve a purpose in today's world, maybe not in the US, but surely in other parts of the world. But the problem is that they get greedy, and couldn't care less if the business lasts for the long run.
    J, I've called no one a name. You seemed to have read something in that isn't there.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  9. #1039
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Walmart workers demand better wages

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    Nuclear missiles and Nuclear armed stealth bombers have been a good negotiating tool also, still doesn't make it a good way to go.
    SOme ways are better than others, but we callthem what they are not what we want to paint them as.


    It is only the "worker's labor" if the company feels like paying the worker for that labor, otherwise, it's the workers time in the unemployment line and the person that accepts what is offered by the company has a job.

    A company never pays less than it "should". It should only have to pay the amount necessary to get and keep a quality worker, and only to quality workers, based upon skill level needed, skill availability in the labor market, training required to attain the needed skill and the economic needs/desires of the company.

    Labor is a competitive market. Each person is their own product they are trying to sell. The company, just like individuals do, shops for the best deal available for their needs/wants. If worker A is too expensive, then they hire worker applicant b, etc. If the price for worker applicant B is acceptable but quality of the applicant, then they move on to worker applicant C. Just like a company has to balance the cost and the quality of it's products to compete in a market, a potential worker also has to do so. It is incumbent upon the individual applying and seeking employment to meet the requirements to be employed, they company does not have change it's requirements unless it is unable to meet it's needs.

    Unions are like a third party stepping in as saying that all products must have a minimum price to be purchased. How would you like it someone made it so that all food items must cost $5 minimum, regardless of quality? Wouldn't work for a product, doesn't work for labor because labor IS a product being marketed.

    Frankly, companies should be able to fire striking workers. They were hired to do a job, they are not doing it, so fire them and hire someone else. Besides making labor cost more, Unions and a lot of Labor protection laws force companies into retaining extra, costly and non/low productive labor.

    And all of those costs are passed on to consumers. In the end, a Union forces higher labor costs in one segment thus raising the cost of product A, workers needing or wanting to by product A must now make more money to afford that product, so the workers that make product B and C now want a raise also, so they force an increase in their labor cost, thus raising the cost for products B and C. Since the labor producing product A wanted the raise to afford more or better products B and C, even though they got the raise, they still cannot afford more or better products B and C because those laborers also got a raise. And so the cycle begins again, except for labor producing product X who was satisfied with their pay and benefits but products A, B and C now cost them more. Eventually, those producing product X will also have to have a raise or they cannot purchase the desired/needed levels of products A, B and C. If products A, B and C are necessities and product X is a luxury, eventually, product X will disappear because it is no longer affordable to the laborers making products A, B and C and the workers producing it now become unemployed.

    How is this constant cycle of inflation good?
    Whoever does thelabor is who the labor belongs to. And all the union does is help negotiate. This is and has always been a fair way to address these types of concerns.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  10. #1040
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Walmart workers demand better wages

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    It is not negotiation. Negotian means a give and take. Where one party offers something and the other side either agree's or comes up with a counter offer. That does not happen in a strike. Ever. Its whole purpose is to cause the company money until they give into a demand. Go look up the definition of of the words "strike" (as applied to a company), negotiation, and extortion. The definition of extortion will apply far more than negotiation.
    Theres aways a give and take. No one gets everything they want. it is a negotiation, even if they strike. Rarely have strikes end with getting everything, if ever. They merely reach a point they both can live with.


    Bold: Yes it is the workers labor. But it is the owners company. And the company has a right to hire who they want and set the price that he/she is willing to pay for the labor involved. If the worker doesn't like it then there are other jobs out there. May not be the jobs that they want...but that is not the companies problem.

    Underlined: If this were true then why doesn't Wal-Mart pay $7.25 an hour? They are not unionized so have no pressure to pay more than minimum wage from a union. So what keeps them paying more than minimum wage? Why doesn't my company pay minimum wage? All I do is take messages over a phone. Yet both companies pay at least 2 dollars above minimum wage. Indeed why don't all companies that are not unionized pay minimum wage? Now I'm not saying that companies won't pay the minimum that they can get away with. But it is not near as bad as your statement leads it to be.
    It is merely missing the word want. It was in my head but didn't make it to the page. My bad.

    Red: This is the truth.

    Blue: A better phrasing perhaps would be that the companies and the workers should be more human and less greedy to each other.
    It would be if that is what I meant. I don't disagree with you, but knowing your a team and looking out for the best interest all around is better than being adversaries. Some unions have mastered this, as have some other employee groups. But the ones we hear the most about haven't, and nor have their employers.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •