• 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

rabbitcaebannog said:
"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?
Click to expand...

For a second there I thought you were really going to use logic.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
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
Click to expand...

Wal-Mart is indeed a tough competitor. They eliminate other retailers and many of the jobs they provide by virtue of Wal-Mart's greater efficiency and productivity. In retail, this has been going on for thousands of years; it's normal. What's different about Wal-Mart is that they share this productivity dividend with the poorest consumers via lower prices and expanded choices. What your source is actually arguing for is a shield from competition for favored small businesses. He would favor those small businesses at the expense of the poor.:peace
 
Jack Hays said:
Wal-Mart is indeed a tough competitor. They eliminate other retailers and many of the jobs they provide by virtue of Wal-Mart's greater efficiency and productivity. In retail, this has been going on for thousands of years; it's normal. What's different about Wal-Mart is that they share this productivity dividend with the poorest consumers via lower prices and expanded choices. What your source is actually arguing for is a shield from competition for favored small businesses. He would favor those small businesses at the expense of the poor.:peace
Click to expand...



You obviously are an infrequent Walmart shopper. The fact that one isn't paid to cart away the trash rather than having to pay for the trash is the problem.......................
 
Bonzai said:
You obviously are an infrequent Walmart shopper. The fact that one isn't paid to cart away the trash rather than having to pay for the trash is the problem.......................
Click to expand...

Good evening, Bonz.:2wave:

I'm surprised by your elitist dismissal of downscale consumers, for whom Wal-Mart is a godsend.:peace
 
On the basis of corporations being persons, the persons in question
function as sick spoiled brats who want to get their own way or they
are going to run off & pout about it..... boo Freaking Hoo ... I say boycott
the sociopaths & have done with it, WE THE PEOPLE can and will do better
without these psycho-monsters who have as their first and foremost, prime directive
their own survival, all else be damned!
 
Menard_K said:
On the basis of corporations being persons, the persons in question
function as sick spoiled brats who want to get their own way or they
are going to run off & pout about it..... boo Freaking Hoo ... I say boycott
the sociopaths & have done with it, WE THE PEOPLE can and will do better
without these psycho-monsters who have as their first and foremost, prime directive
their own survival, all else be damned!
Click to expand...

Misspelled "Earth" unless you had some other planet in mind. Doesn't help your revolutionary credibility.:roll:
 
Jack Hays said:
Misspelled "Earth" unless you had some other planet in mind. Doesn't help your revolutionary credibility.:roll:
Click to expand...

Doesn't help YOUR credibility to pick at nits
rather than address the comment that you took the trouble to quote.
 
People that want a "living wage" need to get a skill or education that qualifies them for a job that pays a "living wage".

:shrug:
 
mac said:
People that want a "living wage" need to get a skill or education that qualifies them for a job that pays a "living wage".

:shrug:
Click to expand...

No they should vote for one.
 
Anthony60 said:
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.
Click to expand...

You missed the point of logic. Your rant has none.
 
Jack Hays said:
Wal-Mart is indeed a tough competitor. They eliminate other retailers and many of the jobs they provide by virtue of Wal-Mart's greater efficiency and productivity. In retail, this has been going on for thousands of years; it's normal. What's different about Wal-Mart is that they share this productivity dividend with the poorest consumers via lower prices and expanded choices. What your source is actually arguing for is a shield from competition for favored small businesses. He would favor those small businesses at the expense of the poor.:peace
Click to expand...

They eliminate the competition by using unethical business practices.
 
mac said:
People that want a "living wage" need to get a skill or education that qualifies them for a job that pays a "living wage".

:shrug:
Click to expand...

Sorry, but this thread has no place for logic.
 
Jack Hays said:
Wal-Mart is indeed a tough competitor. They eliminate other retailers and many of the jobs they provide by virtue of Wal-Mart's greater efficiency and productivity.
Click to expand...
....but, as pointed out, and which you continue to avoid, there is a net job loss.


In retail, this has been going on for thousands of years; it's normal. What's different about Wal-Mart is that they share this productivity dividend with the poorest consumers via lower prices and expanded choices. What your source is actually arguing for is a shield from competition for favored small businesses. He would favor those small businesses at the expense of the poor.
Click to expand...
The point still remains, when you are JOBLESS, the prices would have to get to zero for them to benefit you when your job was eliminated by a Big Box.

And please, don't even get me started on the advantages Big Boxes gain in taxes breaks and free infrastructure small retailers can only dream about.
 
pbrauer said:
There many communities that don't like their strong arm tactics and try to keep them out. ,
Click to expand...

See, if the residents of these communities really didn't want them they wouldn't shop there. If so, the stores would be unprofitable. Is that what happens?
 
Gimmesometruth said:
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
Click to expand...

Why SHOULD stores with higher costs and higher prices stay in business???
 
Gimmesometruth said:
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.
Click to expand...

The issue isn't whether or not minimum wage laws are legal, they are, but the issue is whether or not they make economic sense.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
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.
Click to expand...

The minimum wage reduces competition from lower cost labor. Do you not see that?
 
Bonzai said:
You obviously are an infrequent Walmart shopper. The fact that one isn't paid to cart away the trash rather than having to pay for the trash is the problem.......................
Click to expand...

Are you claiming that consumers are somehow forced to shop at Wal*Mart?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom