• 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

oh but they certainly do capitalize upon it and the US poor to the detriment of the US.

I would say Wal-Mart provides a valuable public service, and I note you have not yet provided requested substantiation of your earlier claims.:peace
 
Ah, but it does mean that the manufacturing job remains in the US.

We do not protect our domestic manufacturing, we allow international retailers/manufacturers to capture market share by undercutting domestic suppliers. This has happened for decades, fabric, radios, tv's, cars, optics, IC's....every industry has suffered the same fate because we allow the corporations to do this.

Consumers do not make the best choice, often they make a choice against their own interests, especially when wages have not kept pace with productivity.

In reality, technological change is undercutting the cost advantages of foreign labor. New manufacturing is springing up in the U.S. because of its extreme efficiency, coupled with the much lower shipping costs associated with manufacture closer to the end market. You are spouting obsolete agitprop!
 
We've also all seen the comparisons between Wal-Mart based employees (Sam's Club) and Costco based employees and the how Wal-Mart pays federal minimum wage to their employees and sees a sliver of the profit per employee that Costco sees from their higher paid and well compensated workers.

If so, can this persist indefinitely? Won't the superior business model win out?
 
First of all, how do consumers benefit by having the profits remain within the country? Why do consumers care about that? If they are investors, they can purchase shares in whatever companies they think are making profits and, as you well know, profitable American companies can sometimes increase those profits by building foreign production facilities. [Other times not.] And, second, what makes you think that foreign goods are sold below cost? That's a recipe for bankruptcy.
I always love it when libertarians get on forums and start asking a WHOLE BUNCH OF QUESTIONS that are answered in any history of US manufacturing post WWII.

Why are you depending upon me to fill you in?
 
Walmart should pay it's employees decent wages, it is ridiculous that some workers partially qualify for state welfare programs because of the poor pay at Walmart.

From what I have so far read, it would be a blessing for towns if Walmart does not open it's doors there. Let one of their competitors open their stores, much healthier for the employees and it would teach Walmart that blackmailing your government will not work.

Why do you suppose it was only (well mainly) Walmart that was singled out for a special (or super) minimum wage at 51% higher than all other DC employers must pay? Why should the minimum wage change based on the size of the retailer and not the profit margin?

How is not opening a store, after a new law labor is passed, blackmail? I seems that you think that the tail is wagging the dog here.
 
Costco hires far fewer workers and purposely loses money on their sales, but makes up for it in membership fees. If you want fewer people employed, then sure, let's have everyone follow Costcos business model.

Sams Club also charges a membership fee.
 
What good does it do to have 3 entire stores with workers that are living below the poverty line and making less profit than somebody that is living much more comfortably. I understand people are taking any job they can get at this point but Costco is clearly benefiting greatly from this model.

But no one is forced to take these jobs, even in a booming economy. These workers have calculated that the job is preferable to alternative uses of their time and effort.
 
Equality under the law.... minimum wage is minimum wage.... this idea of a 'Super" minimum wage is unconstitutional. Walmart is right to pull out.
 
I would say Wal-Mart provides a valuable public service, and I note you have not yet provided requested substantiation of your earlier claims.:peace
I'm supposed to re-counter your "hogwash" comment?

OK....Jack, you don't know jack.

Hows that?

It should be at about the same level.
 
Unemployment actually 4.3-4.4% according to latest data I can find. Not quite as good as North Dakota, but obviously better than average. If everyone had King County's business base then we'd be having a different (and happier) conversation.:peace

Sorry; my bad (working from memory). The Seattle-Bellevue-Everett region, has 3%, not King County. Still, you pack a bunch of Libbies into an area that elects a guy like Jim McDermott and you gotta wonder how on earth we could open a popsicle stand, much less have companies you might have heard of, like: Microsoft; Boeing; AT&T Cellular (McCaw); Amazon; Starbucks; Columbia; Nordstrom; Costco ...

Dumb luck I guess, despite our business-killing $9.19 minimum wage. Or perhaps the more northern latitude, which due to fewer daylight hours in Winter does not actually follow the laws of supply and demand as Professor Emeritus Limbaugh, AM Radio department of Business Finance / Economics would teach. Merely a speculation.
 
Walmart should pay it's employees decent wages, it is ridiculous that some workers partially qualify for state welfare programs because of the poor pay at Walmart.

From what I have so far read, it would be a blessing for towns if Walmart does not open it's doors there. Let one of their competitors open their stores, much healthier for the employees and it would teach Walmart that blackmailing your government will not work.

Workers are better off if they are denied the option of working at Wal*Mart? Consumers are better off if they are denied the option of shopping there? How can this be?
 
Jesus dude, not in a protected market, you removed the context of our conversation.

I know how contanerized shipping has totally changed the economics of imported products.

Either stay within the context of our conversation or ignore me.

What is a "protected market"? And shipping costs from China are significant; manufacturing trends are actually starting to bring production back to the U.S.
 
Unemployment actually 4.3-4.4% according to latest data I can find. Not quite as good as North Dakota, but obviously better than average. If everyone had King County's business base then we'd be having a different (and happier) conversation.:peace

Zero state income tax, right?
 
bunch of Libbies..... our business-killing $9.19 minimum wage......... Professor Emeritus Limbaugh, AM Radio
Wow.....you call yourself "very liberal", you castigate liberals as you put down Limbaugh.

That is really all over the map.
 
Um, society did not create the US (declining) manufacturing and consumer market, corporations are in near total control of all aspects, from creation to sales.

I'm getting repetitive, but technological change is altering the economics of manufacturing. And what, exactly, is "society"? Corporations exist outside of society?
 
oh but they certainly do capitalize upon it and the US poor to the detriment of the US.

They capitalize on it for the benefit of their customers. That's what has made them so successful.
 
Last edited:
They capitalize on it for the benefit of their customers. that's what has made them so successful.
No, they capitalize to the benefit of the stockholder. Sick that day too I see.
 
I always love it when libertarians get on forums and start asking a WHOLE BUNCH OF QUESTIONS that are answered in any history of US manufacturing post WWII.

Why are you depending upon me to fill you in?

Because serious economists have looked for examples of "predatory pricing", which is what I assume you are talking about. It's easy to talk about but pretty hard to find.
 
Workers are better off if they are denied the option of working at Wal*Mart? Consumers are better off if they are denied the option of shopping there? How can this be?

It can easily be, if those "workers" that you wish to "protect" are highly paid union grocery store workers that fear non-union competition (and contribute to the DC official's campaigns). Everyone concentrates on the cheap Chinese trinkets that WalMart sells while ignorng the real threat to big union chain grocery stores - the other "big stores" in DC that were expempted from this super minimum wage law. The parts of DC that WalMart wanted to enter currently lack competition for grocery shopping. You tend to concentrate on identifying the losers, when identifying the winners tells the story much more clearly. ;)
 
The elderly, recovering drug addicts, and part-time college students are not going to be paid 12 dollars an hour period. The fact that Walmart even pays people to stand at the door and greet customers is pretty impressive of them. If Walmart is forced to pay 12 dollars an hour, it will likely end up moving towards automated check-out systems therefore minimizing the staff. That means firing all the people who can't get jobs anywhere else.

The notion that one putting food in bags is an adequate contribution to society to be capable of living comfortably is ridiculous.

If you hire people to stand at the door and welcome people, it must mean that the company thinks it has added value. If you hire a person you must give it an appropriate wage. Now I am not saying that 12 dollars an hour is that amount but it must be at least the minimum wage.

I could care less what service someone is providing, putting food into bags is just as valid a job as sweeping floors or frying fries etc. You looking down on a function does not mean that a fair wage should not be paid for it.
 
Back
Top Bottom