• 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!

Corporations Aren't People

If corporations are people, then when they have been found to be breaking laws, no settling with fines, they shut be required to close their collective doors for a set period of time (jail), and if the crimes are serious enough, dissolved entirely (death).

Once corporations are held to the same level of liabilities for their collective actions as I am for mine, then by all means, they may enjoy similar rights and privileges.
 
20 and 30 bucks an hour? For a grocery store? Are you BSing me?

20 is a little high, but perfectly possible if an employee has been in that spot long enough, getting mandatory minimum wages enforced by the union. And Sundays are time and a half for some folks.
 
No it's not, unless you believe in conscription or indentured servitude.

So if BJs Wholesale Club announces that it, and it's employees, support Mitt Romney, my only recourse should be to ditch my career there, and start over?
 
So if BJs Wholesale Club announces that it, and it's employees, support Mitt Romney, my only recourse should be to ditch my career there, and start over?

You don't have to. You're free to work as you choose. I'm a self-preservationist, so I'm fine with them molesting Cambodian children in the stock room if I gets my money.
 
You don't have to. You're free to work as you choose. I'm a self-preservationist, so I'm fine with them molesting Cambodian children in the stock room if I gets my money.

Yeah, sure, except that part of my pay is in company stock. MY money is being used to send the message that I support Mitt Romney.



Corporations ain't people. I'm flummoxed that this is a difficult message to get across.
 
No it's not, unless you believe in conscription or indentured servitude.

I want whole milk from the Amish farmer, but that's illegal. Have to get regulated milk from Corporate dairy that initiated the regulation that all milk must be pasteurized/homogenized. Regulation by Corporation biting my ass. I don't want any Nuclear electricity and regulators have forced this "welfare queen" up my rectum and it hangs like a big hemmrhoid sp. I want to sell electricity to my neighbor but that is illegal by regulation initiated by large Energy Corporations to protect their franchises. This list could go on and on, but I hope you get the point. Regulation puts small businesses out of business. Large Corporations are cheerleaders for these regulation and often authors of the legislation.
 
Can I, being of fairly sound mind and body, declare myself a limited liability person?
 
Cutting wages does mean lower prices. But for food stamps, medicare, and welfare, reduce them and/or put additional requirements around them. I find it funny that the very people that insist we pay all these welfare programs and keep the requirements low are, for the most part, the very ones that complain that people have to use them and won't let the requirements be increased or payouts reduced. Walmart shouldn't have to pay some unskilled position $20.00 an hour just because some people want to make welfare programs available to more then we can afford.

Actually, the best thing to do in this situation may be to take away all state subsidies and then the people will have to stand up for their right to better pay or Walmart won't find workers. I've a feeling most people won't accept working all day long to take home poverty level wages. You would have more people with a stake in the game if they can't feed their family. No government benefits to fall back on. I say let's do it before or country goes backward anymore.
 
Can I, being of fairly sound mind and body, declare myself a limited liability person?

Sort of. You can incorporate and write the charter to cover all of your activities, because a corporation can only do what is written in the charter. A broadly written charter should handle that. Then everything you do is business and everything you buy is a business expense. You will pay corporate tax rates and be required to make a profit in one out of 5 years, I think. Considerable paperwork. Legal fees, etc. You could probably do the same thing with an LLC.
 
Lower wages does not automatically translate to lower consumer prices. It simple means lower operating cost for the employer/corporation. They shift the savings to other areas, I.e., pension funds, taxes, insurance, etc. But rarely do those cost savings go directly to merchandising. Corporations do what they always do when it comes to lowering the cost of goods - combine savings across the board with renegotiated contracts to buy best quality at lower prices at term. Either that or they do things the old fashioned way - buy the small business OR jump into that particular marketplace themselves, I.e., Walmart's lower prices for produce = they contract w/local farmers OR they buy the farm.

In a free market with competition, yes, lower wages will result in lower prices.
 
In a free market with competition, yes, lower wages will result in lower prices.

First, no such thing as a free market, and second....tell that to the Chinese.
 
You can't have it both ways. You can't claim unions force higher wages then place the blame on competition for low wage jobs on social programs footing the bill for said employees basic health and survival needs, I.e., supplemental food cost (welfare/WIC) and health care (Medicai). Either it's unions that are causing the problems you claim exists or it's market demand forcing employers to raise wages to compete for the services of said "unskilled workers".

Unions are affecting more then just wages. As indicated, they also force inefficient use of that labor. But yes, unions are forcing wages to be at a level that the market does not support and the job is not worth. If they were to reduce welfare type programs, the wages for labor may (or may not) increase a bit, but not nearly as high as the unions have required. Regardless, if wages would increase or not, the people that most support welfare programs are primarily the ones that whine and act surprised that someone is taking advantage of them.

BTW, I saw a stat on MSNBC that showed only 10% of Walmart's workers are on Medicare. If that's true, it doesn't seem that big a problem anyway.
 
20 and 30 bucks an hour? For a grocery store? Are you BSing me?

Nope. The cashier's with the most seniority will make over $20 + benefits and on Sunday, at time and a half, it's $30/hour. I used to work for them I my HS/college days. Had I stayed with them, I'd be in that $20.00 / hour range. Not bad for simply passing items over a scanner.
 
First, no such thing as a free market, and second....tell that to the Chinese.

I hear this from (mostly) people on the left all the time. The US is a "free market", not a "completely free market". Free markets can have some government controls.
 
Nope. The cashier's with the most seniority will make over $20 + benefits and on Sunday, at time and a half, it's $30/hour. I used to work for them I my HS/college days. Had I stayed with them, I'd be in that $20.00 / hour range. Not bad for simply passing items over a scanner.

That's insane. I mean, I'm aware of merit raises, and I agree with that. However, most of those unskilled, uneducated jobs I've heard of, you cap out after a certain amount. Like at Walmart, I'm sure you get merit raises every 6 months for a while, but after about 10 years I would imagine that you're pretty much capped at what you can make, and only receive raises for increases in minimum wage or COLAs.
 
It is a fact.

If not for the welfare state, employees would probably not take the jobs that pay less, forcing the employee to raise their prices to compete for the labor. (Mainly) Democrats have decided to subsidize lower wage employers by offering such benefits. If that's what people want, great, but then don't complain and act surprised when people or businesses take advantage of it.

I guess they could just not eat until they found a "real" job. Or walk across the country to where the work is better and hope to not get arrested for vagrancy on the way.

These "get a job" arguments are SO vacuous.
 
Unions are affecting more then just wages. As indicated, they also force inefficient use of that labor. But yes, unions are forcing wages to be at a level that the market does not support and the job is not worth. If they were to reduce welfare type programs, the wages for labor may (or may not) increase a bit, but not nearly as high as the unions have required. Regardless, if wages would increase or not, the people that most support welfare programs are primarily the ones that whine and act surprised that someone is taking advantage of them.

BTW, I saw a stat on MSNBC that showed only 10% of Walmart's workers are on Medicare. If that's true, it doesn't seem that big a problem anyway.

It seems to me you don't practice what you preach. I see some whining about unions which happens to give back some type of power to the workers. They wouldn't have to whine about low wages and/or collect subsidies if they got better pay. There is no reason why a store like Walmart can't provide that to their workers. Plenty of other stores have proven it. With that said, I do understand why workers get intimidated. It really only takes one strong leader to cure that in any work place. I would like to see more take a stand rather than less.
 
It isn't always about direct contributions to politicians. Unions spend far more money on a wider range of political activities, including supporting state and local candidates and deploying what has long been seen as the unions' most potent political weapon: persuading members to vote as unions want them to. The new figures come from a little-known set of annual reports to the Labor Department in which local unions, their national parents and labor federations have been required to detail their spending on politics and lobbying since 2005.

Political Spending by Unions

And yet CU grants anonymity to corporate and private donors.
 
I guess they could just not eat until they found a "real" job. Or walk across the country to where the work is better and hope to not get arrested for vagrancy on the way.

These "get a job" arguments are SO vacuous.

It's their only defense.
 
That's insane. I mean, I'm aware of merit raises, and I agree with that. However, most of those unskilled, uneducated jobs I've heard of, you cap out after a certain amount. Like at Walmart, I'm sure you get merit raises every 6 months for a while, but after about 10 years I would imagine that you're pretty much capped at what you can make, and only receive raises for increases in minimum wage or COLAs.

There are employees at Jewel working under two different contracts. The people under the older contracts are the ones making over $20/hour. People under the newer contract are in the 10-12 range. I'd have to look at the latest contract info to find out the new employee's ranges and I don't think we have one hanging around right now.
 
There is no reason why a store like Walmart can't provide that to their workers. Plenty of other stores have proven it.

Other then competition and being able to offer lower prices then the other stores.
 
Actually, the best thing to do in this situation may be to take away all state subsidies and then the people will have to stand up for their right to better pay or Walmart won't find workers. I've a feeling most people won't accept working all day long to take home poverty level wages. You would have more people with a stake in the game if they can't feed their family. No government benefits to fall back on. I say let's do it before or country goes backward anymore.

I'm not so sure.

We lost our manufacturing base to people working for survival level wages to avoid dying.

When they have you by the balls...
 
There are employees at Jewel working under two different contracts. The people under the older contracts are the ones making over $20/hour. People under the newer contract are in the 10-12 range. I'd have to look at the latest contract info to find out the new employee's ranges and I don't think we have one hanging around right now.

You know those guys making 20 an hour have to be practically model citizens. If I took over management, I'd watch the 20-an-hour like a hawk and fire them for even the smallest screw-up. Union be damned.
 
You know those guys making 20 an hour have to be practically model citizens. If I took over management, I'd watch the 20-an-hour like a hawk and fire them for even the smallest screw-up. Union be damned.

They are well protected. A few of my wife's good friends are under the old contract. Most of them are fine cashiers (whatever that really requires), but one of them is a truly awful cashier. She shares too much (TMI) with the customers where the customers will complain at times, she's slow at her job, She's made some mistakes etc... but she's safe. Pretty much as long as she doesn't get caught stealing and her attendance is good.. .she'll be OK.
 
Back
Top Bottom