• 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

I've noticed, in terms of prices, Wal-Mart is generally cheaper, though other stores often have sales that push certain products cheaper than or comparable to Wal-Mart.

The problem with "sale" shopping is that the savings on the sale items must exceed the fuel/time required to shop several stores.
 
The problem with "sale" shopping is that the savings on the sale items must exceed the fuel/time required to shop several stores.

Sure. I'm fortunate to have several stores in walking distance so it's not a large concern of mine, but I can see how Wal-Mart blanket prices would be economically advantageous even if certain things are cheaper elsewhere at the time.
 
It happens in right to work states. Unions are barred from negotiating a closed shop. That is anti freedom and dictates contract terms.

:shrug: equally anti freedom is the law which forbids employers from forbidding a union. If you want to trade unions being able to refuse to participate unless they control everyone for employers being able to refuse to participate unless unions control no one as the starting position for each :shrug: I'd go along with that. Otherwise, let us implement right to work so that both sides are equally yoked.
 
Do you have a time machine? What good are price differences from spring 2011?

That is what I found using google.
if they have lower prices its because they don't compensate their employees very well.
 
Au contraire. They are the only chain that can compete with military PX outlets.

From 2011! What bilge! Besides, Target doesn't dare open near US military installations.

This is correct. When I was a young E-3 with a family living in the States, Wal-Mart saved me tons of money compared to shopping anywhere else, even the BX.
 

from the article:

"For the first time in four years, our price comparisons between the two has shown that Target has a slight edge over Wal-Mart," said Johnson. A smaller study by Kantar Retail found similar results.

Wal-Mart typically maintains a 2% to 4% price advantage over Target. But in January, Johnson noticed that some products were cheaper at Target.
 
Wal-Mart hate is stupid. Don't like their stores? Don't shop there. Don't like their paychecks? Don't work there.
 
Wal-Mart hate is stupid. Don't like their stores? Don't shop there. Don't like their paychecks? Don't work there.
There many communities that don't like their strong arm tactics and try to keep them out. ,
 
There many communities that don't like their strong arm tactics and try to keep them out. ,

Well, I guess if they don't want the tax revenue and jobs.....go for it.
 
That is what I found using google.
if they have lower prices its because they don't compensate their employees very well.

The biggest price advantage gained by WalMart is gained through buying in huge quantities and using massive regional distribution centers.
 
Wal-Mart hate is stupid. Don't like their stores? Don't shop there. Don't like their paychecks? Don't work there.

Don't like their competition then use politicians to pass laws to keep them out. ;)
 
That is what I found using google.
if they have lower prices its because they don't compensate their employees very well.

If their employees aren't happy with their salaries, they should go get another job. Oh, wait, the economy is still in the crapper. The only jobs that are out there are minimum wage jobs. My bad.
 
In reality, they are getting a job with wages and benefits negotiated by the union and paid for by their peers. Now it is also expected of unions to represent these free loaders who may need the union to represent them if management does something against union contract. It's the definition of "free loader".

He owes the union nothing. What if he got his job before the union negotiated a new contract, and the union members got the same package he did? By your thinking, then everyone else owes him dues.
 
They don't have lower prices. Your in TX right? HEB. Kroger does too.

Target has the same prices.

I'm shocked that you go to stores with low prices. I thought that was against your (the left's) thinking. After all, you want WalMart paying higher prices for labor than they have to.

I thought everyone on the left did what they want WalMart to do, that is to pay higher prices than the asking price.
 
My guess to the Republican/conservative reaction to this news:

Despite the fact they constantly blast Obama for an economy with slumping take home pay and an increase of low wage jobs, Republicans/conservatives will now come out to gleefully point out how the liberal agenda is destroying the economy and taking away jobs.

That's merely a guess...let's see how it plays out.
That's what the OP said.
 
I'm shocked that you go to stores with low prices. I thought that was against your (the left's) thinking. After all, you want WalMart paying higher prices for labor than they have to.

I thought everyone on the left did what they want WalMart to do, that is to pay higher prices than the asking price.

Nothing wrong with low prices as long as its ethical busines.
 
They help the poor by offering them retail opportunities that no one else does.
They provide some replacement employment for jobs that walmart wipes out.


1. Wal-Mart’s Economic Impacts: Net Loss of Jobs, Fewer Small Businesses

Wal-Mart store openings kill three local jobs for every two they create by reducing retail employment by an average of 2.7 percent in every county they enter.
Wal-Mart’s entry into a new market does not increase overall retail activity or employment opportunities. Research from Chicago shows retail employment did not increase in Wal-Mart’s zip code, and fell significantly in those adjacent.
Wal-Mart’s entry into a new market has a strongly negative effect on existing retailers. Supermarkets and discount variety stores are the most adversely effected sectors, suffering sales declines of 10 to 40% after Wal-Mart moves in.

Stores near a new Wal-Mart are at increased risk of going out of business. After a single Wal-Mart opened in Chicago in September 2006, 82 of the 306 small businesses in the surrounding neighborhood had gone out of business by March 2008.

The value of Wal-Mart to the economy will likely be less than the value of the jobs and businesses it replaces. A study looking at the estimating the future impact of Wal-Mart on the grocery industry in California found that, “the full economic impact of those lost wages and benefits throughout southern California could approach $2.8 billion per year.”

Chain stores, like Wal-Mart send most of their revenues out of the community, while local businesses keep more consumer dollars in local economy: for every $100 spent in locally owned businesses, $68 stayed in the local economy while chain stores only left $43 to re-circulate locally.

New Study: Wal-Mart Means Fewer Jobs, Less Small Businesses, More Burden on Taxpayers | NYC Public Advocate
 
They provide some replacement employment for jobs that walmart wipes out.


1. Wal-Mart’s Economic Impacts: Net Loss of Jobs, Fewer Small Businesses

Wal-Mart store openings kill three local jobs for every two they create by reducing retail employment by an average of 2.7 percent in every county they enter.
Wal-Mart’s entry into a new market does not increase overall retail activity or employment opportunities. Research from Chicago shows retail employment did not increase in Wal-Mart’s zip code, and fell significantly in those adjacent.
Wal-Mart’s entry into a new market has a strongly negative effect on existing retailers. Supermarkets and discount variety stores are the most adversely effected sectors, suffering sales declines of 10 to 40% after Wal-Mart moves in.

Stores near a new Wal-Mart are at increased risk of going out of business. After a single Wal-Mart opened in Chicago in September 2006, 82 of the 306 small businesses in the surrounding neighborhood had gone out of business by March 2008.

The value of Wal-Mart to the economy will likely be less than the value of the jobs and businesses it replaces. A study looking at the estimating the future impact of Wal-Mart on the grocery industry in California found that, “the full economic impact of those lost wages and benefits throughout southern California could approach $2.8 billion per year.”

Chain stores, like Wal-Mart send most of their revenues out of the community, while local businesses keep more consumer dollars in local economy: for every $100 spent in locally owned businesses, $68 stayed in the local economy while chain stores only left $43 to re-circulate locally.

New Study: Wal-Mart Means Fewer Jobs, Less Small Businesses, More Burden on Taxpayers | NYC Public Advocate

Businesses can adapt. It's not the governments roll to get into what companies can pay or what they can charge for their goods. Those decisions must be left to the consumer.
 
Businesses can adapt. It's not the governments roll to get into what companies can pay or what they can charge for their goods. Those decisions must be left to the consumer.
A corporation is granted charter to operate within a state, a state govt (representative of the citizens) can and does set requirements that the corporation must use to operate within the charter granted. Nearly every state has minimum wage laws, so yes Virginia, a "consumer" citizen can tell a corporation what it must pay.

Your comment was a nonsequitur to my quoted post.
 
Precisely. You get it, why are you asking me to explain? The only point you're leaving out is that, as wages are pushed above market equilibrium levels, labor is priced out of the market. But for a while, at least, organized labor is protected.
I am still waiting for you to explain this "protecting" of Union wages by the minimum wage. If a minimum wage rises, it gets closer to a Union wage....so how is the Union wage "protected"?

You have neither defined the "protection" or shown the mechanism.
 
He owes the union nothing. What if he got his job before the union negotiated a new contract, and the union members got the same package he did? By your thinking, then everyone else owes him dues.

"By your thinking"...... Okay, using logic, the union contract would not be the same as whatever was in place prior to the union negotiated contract.
Did you have a point?
 
A corporation is granted charter to operate within a state, a state govt (representative of the citizens) can and does set requirements that the corporation must use to operate within the charter granted. Nearly every state has minimum wage laws, so yes Virginia, a "consumer" citizen can tell a corporation what it must pay. Your comment was a nonsequitur to my quoted post.

Of course they can tell businesses what to pay, what licenses they need, where they can have their business, and so on.The government can now insist on all these things and they are doing that and a lot more. Many are recocognizing that government is killing business and that was recent;y demonstrated by the insanity of Obamacare.

Those who insist on these rules and red tape should not be upset when businesses move to another State, or leave the country, That is the only response many businesses have. Unless, of course, they are 'too big to fail and then, if the government might gain more power, they will hand over taxpayer dollars.
 
It's not the governments roll to get into what companies can pay
Of course they (govt) can tell businesses what to pay
Whew, glad we got that straightened out.

Those who insist on these rules and red tape should not be upset when businesses move to another State, or leave the country, That is the only response many businesses have.
If that is what the big boxes decide to do, fine. They don't have to (especially in WM case), but if they do, so be it...there are plenty willing to replace them.

I have to note, it is funny you complaining about "to big to fail" in an argument about "big boxes".
 
Back
Top Bottom