• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Walmart says it will kill plans to build 3 new stores if DC wage bill passes

ocean515 said:
How much would be required to subsidize their existance if Walmart wasn't in the county?
Click to expand...

$0.00 Provided they were not employed by some other greedy pricks that exploit their labor and push off their responsibility for fair compensation on the tax paying public.
 
polgara said:
What is your definition of "living wage?" Is it subject to change when everything costs more than it used to last week?
Click to expand...

What ever it takes for one man or woman to eek out a meager existence without the need for public assistance. A roof over your head 3 meals a day, could be hotdogs, macaroni and cheese and Ramon noodles and a bicycle to ride to work. Not a whole lot more required.
 
blaxshep said:
$0.00 Provided they were not employed by some other greedy pricks that exploit their labor and push off their responsibility for fair compensation on the tax paying public.
Click to expand...

So nobody would be living there, or, are you just a little bit biased in your estimating?
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Your argument is that CBC decided to run the story to cause anger towards Walmart.....and that the employees fired are liars? Anything to back this up?

Let me get this, Walmart is reported on daily, some of it negative.....and this little story was a planned event...by the Canadian Broadcast Company?

Really?

sigh...
Click to expand...

I did not call anyone a liar. What I said was that we don't know at this point what the truth is. There is a difference. ...sigh...
 
wbcoleman said:
Excuse me, how would Wal*Mart's customers benefit from higher prices? Consumers benefit from lower prices. This isn't rocket science.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily true. I would rather spend more for better quality of goods and service.
 
blaxshep said:
What ever it takes for one man or woman to eek out a meager existence without the need for public assistance. A roof over your head 3 meals a day, could be hotdogs, macaroni and cheese and Ramon noodles and a bicycle to ride to work. Not a whole lot more required.
Click to expand...

Could you put a dollar amount on that?
 
ocean515 said:
So nobody would be living there, or, are you just a little bit biased in your estimating?
Click to expand...

A little biased maybe yea but for the life of me I just can not understand why people defend the idea of tax payer subsidized labor.
 
blaxshep said:
Not necessarily true. I would rather spend more for better quality of goods and service.
Click to expand...

And you can do that. Wal-mart gives people the option to pay less for goods and devices that satisfy their needs. Choices are good, right? You like having them, don't you?
 
polgara said:
Hi, Sisyphus! :2wave:

Where else can conservatives go? The choices are somewhat limited, you know! :lamo:

Just curious, but wasn't Sisyphus the guy who forever had to push a boulder uphill as punishment for something?
Click to expand...

Correct. "Sisyphean" is essentially toiling endlessly to no effect. Kinda like debating Righties. ;) ;)
 
ocean515 said:
Could you put a dollar amount on that?
Click to expand...

Have not looked into it in that detail. I know the current minimum wage is not enough and although I personally would like to see it around $30K I seriously doubt it would need to be that high. Guessing 22-25K ?
 
wbcoleman said:
Excuse me, how would Wal*Mart's customers benefit from higher prices? Consumers benefit from lower prices. This isn't rocket science.
Click to expand...
How would US consumers benefit from purchasing US goods?

You really need that one answered....or is this just libertarian selfishness at play?
 
Papa bull said:
And you can do that. Wal-mart gives people the option to pay less for goods and devices that satisfy their needs. Choices are good, right? You like having them, don't you?
Click to expand...


Oh yea I have no issue with options or even cheap stuff, just saying sometimes you really get what you pay for.
 
blaxshep said:
What ever it takes for one man or woman to eek out a meager existence without the need for public assistance. A roof over your head 3 meals a day, could be hotdogs, macaroni and cheese and Ramon noodles and a bicycle to ride to work. Not a whole lot more required.
Click to expand...

Blaxshep, your argument is not with me. I agree with you. So how do we provide those jobs that pay a living wage, when businesses are apprehensive about their future?
 
blaxshep said:
A little biased maybe yea but for the life of me I just can not understand why people defend the idea of tax payer subsidized labor.
Click to expand...

For the life of me, if that is your beef, I can't understand the selective indignation.
 
blaxshep said:
Have not looked into it in that detail. I know the current minimum wage is not enough and although I personally would like to see it around $30K I seriously doubt it would need to be that high. Guessing 22-25K ?
Click to expand...

You understand that such a move would eliminate job opportunities for young people seeking their first jobs? I don't understand the willingness to crush young people.

Makes zero sense to me.
 
polgara said:
I did not call anyone a liar. What I said was that we don't know at this point what the truth is. There is a difference. ...sigh...
Click to expand...
You are the one casting doubt upon the employees...so lets hear the evidence for this doubt.

I notice you completely sidestepped your reasoning for believing the CBC deliberately posted this story on a certain day....again, where are you getting this?

Their is a pattern here, it is pro-corporation, pro Walmart.....while you claim to not support Walmart.

Very confused posting.
 
Sisyphus said:
Correct. "Sisyphean" is essentially toiling endlessly to no effect. Kinda like debating Righties. ;) ;)
Click to expand...

:funnypost: Or from the other side of the aisle, like debating Lefties! :lamo:
 
Gimmesometruth said:
How would US consumers benefit from purchasing US goods?

You really need that one answered....or is this just libertarian selfishness at play?
Click to expand...

I don't know, you tell me. How DO consumers benefit from higher-priced goods [quality held constant]?
 
You people do realize that DC is so over-developed that land costs like a million dollars a square inch as opposed to other places Walmart goes I hope.
 
blaxshep said:
Oh yea I have no issue with options or even cheap stuff, just saying sometimes you really get what you pay for.
Click to expand...

I agree and would even say that most times you get what you pay for. Sometimes cheap is good enough. Sometimes the real value is in buying the best. Choices the good.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
How would US consumers benefit from purchasing US goods?

You really need that one answered....or is this just libertarian selfishness at play?
Click to expand...

What is in the best interest of the consumer? Paying more for a product or less? Like it or not, paying less at the store is in the interest of the consumer as it allows their income to go further. Besides, paying more at the store doesn't mean they will in turn be paid more, nor does it mean they will be able to buy as much as they could before, but then it doesn't mean they will be able to buy less automatically either. The fact is that for the consumer there is no reason to pay more when they could just as easily pay less. One of the keys to success is being able to provide a product for cheaper than your competitor and as a consumer there is very little reason to support someone that can't do this.
 
Last edited:
wbcoleman said:
I don't know, you tell me. How DO consumers benefit from higher-priced goods [quality held constant]?
Click to expand...
Um, consumers benefit from buying domestic product by having the profits remain with the country.

Allowing below cost products to gain market share destroys domestic manufacturing, wipes out domestic jobs. It is a race to the bottom that only benefits the international corporation.

But being a libertarian, you are in favor of international corporations doing this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom