• 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 Gives 500,000 Workers A Raise

HenryChinaski said:
It seems simple in my view, if the employer is paying a bare minimum that has been deemed necessary in order to survive wherever that employee is working, City, region, whatever, then the worker who is collecting those wages doesn't need My money to cover the rest of the rent and/or weekly food bill. They can cover the bare bones needs and We taxpayers save dough.
Click to expand...

It seems simple but it isn't. The current MW worker working full time brings home enough money to put them almost at the poverty level for a family of two and if they had a family of two then the EITC would push them well above that but they would still likely be elgible for some form of public assistance, especially if that other person in their household is a child.
 
Declan said:
...

Is there a better way to lift boats than through wage floors because it sounds good? Isn't this really macro blurring of systemic and growing micro problems? Isn't what we need some kind of localized solution instead of some kind of one-sized fit all national solution.? I think so, I am just not sure the best way to go about doing it.
Click to expand...

Is there any evidence that a higher minimum wage would suck money out of a particular local area?

So let's say that I am a low wage worker working at McDonalds and I get a wage increase. I spend that money mostly within my community, and businesses in my community then have a need to expand, and create more jobs, and hire more people who in turn have more money to spend locally. Other businesses recognize that the existing ones in my community are doing better, so they invest in my community, creating more jobs, and bringing even more money into my community.

I understand what you are saying about some of the money migrating out of the local economy due to the fact that most of the goods we purchase aren't locally made, but there are other factors that tend to balance that.

I also think that there is a moral hazard in having a minimum wage based upon local living costs. Maybe poor people shouldn't live in high cost of living areas. If I was a minimum wage worker, I certainly wouldn't chose to live in Manhattan or Beverly Hills. That doesn't mean that I can't work there though, I can commute.
 
imagep said:
Is there any evidence that a higher minimum wage would suck money out of a particular local area?

So let's say that I am a low wage worker working at McDonalds and I get a wage increase. I spend that money mostly within my community, and businesses in my community then have a need to expand, and create more jobs, and hire more people who in turn have more money to spend locally. Other businesses recognize that the existing ones in my community are doing better, so they invest in my community, creating more jobs, and bringing even more money into my community.

I understand what you are saying about some of the money migrating out of the local economy due to the fact that most of the goods we purchase aren't locally made, but there are other factors that tend to balance that.

I also think that there is a moral hazard in having a minimum wage based upon local living costs. Maybe poor people shouldn't live in high cost of living areas. If I was a minimum wage worker, I certainly wouldn't chose to live in Manhattan or Beverly Hills. That doesn't mean that I can't work there though, I can commute.
Click to expand...

Dead zones lose money regardless of how much the worker is making, but I am unaware of a study linking it to just MW effects. One of the reasons "local currencies" are usually successful (though not always) is because that money stays in the local economy because Amazon doesn't take Declanville Dollars. These types of alt currencies add economic velocity without being able to be exported to other communities which helps local businesses that participate, especially when the community does their own version of Briton woods and peg the value to a large deposit of cash they hold in reserve.
 
Declan said:
Dead zones lose money regardless of how much the worker is making, but I am unaware of a study linking it to just MW effects. One of the reasons "local currencies" are usually successful (though not always) is because that money stays in the local economy because Amazon doesn't take Declanville Dollars. These types of alt currencies add economic velocity without being able to be exported to other communities which helps local businesses that participate, especially when the community does their own version of Briton woods and peg the value to a large deposit of cash they hold in reserve.
Click to expand...

So basically you are just reducing the opportunity to trade with national level firms. Wouldn't that permanently eliminate the possibility of any new investment into the area, esentially making the dead zone even deader? And if someone was going to pay me with Declanville Dollars, but I needed US dollars to spend on Amazon, then regardless of any pegging, I still wouldn't value those Declanville Dollars as much as federal reserve dollars.
 
Thrilla said:
what?

business are free to raise prices because of cost increases...where did you get the idea they are not?
Click to expand...

You're right. Businesses are free to price their goods and services at a point that produces less profits.

costs is a primary determining factor in pricing, but it's not the only factor... so I think I kinda agree with you on that point.
Click to expand...

Cost is an important factor but not a determinative one so we're close to each other on this one. While price has to be high enough to produce sufficient profit and cash flow, after that the market determines the optimal price.
 
jet57 said:
Unions are working very hard to get people off of public assistance. I guess you want people earning peanuts, if anything and on the dole so you can gripe about how lazy they are.
Click to expand...

How much more would an employee take home if they were unionized and had to pay union dues?

The unions are concerned about the unions, not the employees.
 
Well this is nice. Regardless of your political affiliation it should make everyone glad to see so many Americans getting a raise and a likely better quality of life. I'm sure Walmart wouldn't have done this if they thought it would have severe consequences for them. I'm pleased =).
 
Mason66 said:
How much more would an employee take home if they were unionized and had to pay union dues?

The unions are concerned about the unions, not the employees.
Click to expand...

A lot. Dues are usually twice the hourly wage a month. So for $10 an hour it would be $20 a month so that would leave a person $1713. a month.

And unions are employees, that's how they work.
 
jet57 said:
A lot. Dues are usually twice the hourly wage a month. So for $10 an hour it would be $20 a month so that would leave a person $1713. a month.

And unions are employees, that's how they work.
Click to expand...

Where are you getting your numbers that a small raise would give the employee an extra $1713.00 per month?
 
Mason66 said:
Where are you getting your numbers that a small raise would give the employee an extra $1713.00 per month?
Click to expand...

10.00 x 2080 hours a year (full time) / by 12 months.
 
Thrilla said:
what makes you think I have sour grapes?... be specific.
Click to expand...

You're just grousing because walmart lost and will continue to lose. It will eventually be a boon for walmart when they grow up and find that they have a lot more shoppers because they're treating their people better. When I'm satisfied for instance, I'll shop there too.
 
faithful_servant said:
WM doesn't capitulate to anything. They make logical business decisions based on $$$$ and nothing else. All the hue and cry in the world wouldn't get them to make decisions that would cost them money.
Click to expand...

walmart capitulated.
 
faithful_servant said:
Nope. WM is not raising it's base to $12/hr, it's raising it to ~$10/hr. If the study was accurate, they would have raised the base wage to $12/hr, since that would have them more money.
Click to expand...

That's what the article said; $10 an hour. I don't know where you're getting $12 from.
 
jet57 said:
You're just grousing because walmart lost and will continue to lose. It will eventually be a boon for walmart when they grow up and find that they have a lot more shoppers because they're treating their people better. When I'm satisfied for instance, I'll shop there too.
Click to expand...

you're making claims and assumptions you can't back up....do you really want to set your self up to be embarrassed again?
 
I assume Walmart gave into public pressure.

But anyone that thinks raising labor costs significantly with zero increase in productivity will NOT mean less jobs simply has no idea what they are talking about.

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/44995
 
Thrilla said:
you're making claims and assumptions you can't back up....do you really want to set your self up to be embarrassed again?
Click to expand...

I'm not making anything up: it's all fact. Go back and read the article dude.
 
DA60 said:
I assume Walmart gave into public pressure.

But anyone that thinks raising labor costs significantly with zero increase in productivity will bring more jobs simply has no idea what they are talking about.

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/44995
Click to expand...

You're post makes no sense in the context of organizing or giving raises. In the walmart case, the company is making money hand over fist, so now they have to share it. This will only increase their volume. Productivity in a retail market is only based on volume of business. So, people are not going to leave walmart at all, more people just going to shop more.
 
Thrilla said:
learn the difference between fact and opinion.... and stop feeding me union propaganda
Click to expand...

I have nothing but experience in the field of labor so I've got a leg up on anything you might argue.

Look, you're just going to have to face facts: walmart has been forced to capitulate into raising wages. So the organizing drive is working out well.
 
HenryChinaski said:
Free market = Most who work for living make a dollar an hour, or put another way, 'Right Wing wet dream' but if the "free-market" deems it so then your pay will be increased up to two dollars an hour.
Click to expand...

You should at least attempt to educate yourself instead of devolving down into nonsensical hyperbole.
 
Thrilla said:
the article does not cover my beliefs on the matter... your assumptions, however, do.
Click to expand...

Your beliefs mean nothing to the reality. Moreover, I've not assumed anything. It's all proven in the OP article.
 
OrphanSlug said:
It was going to happen, but social and political pressure to increase wage rates without any real economic pressure to do so may cause an adverse affect. By economics it will come down to what others do, such as Target and other national retail & food service chains. If they all go up to follow suit then we could see less demand for that wage rate employee. This may be compounded by large fast food chains such as McDonald's and the Yum Brands group (KFC, Taco Bell and Pizza Hut... who as a group employs more than McDonald's does.)
Click to expand...

... laborers deciding the value of their labor isn't any less arbitrary than executives deciding the value of their leadership. Service industries that fail to provide human personnel to interact with will gradually fall into disfavor among demographics who prefer a more public interface, which is most of them.
 
jet57 said:
I have nothing but experience in the field of labor so I've got a leg up on anything you might argue.

Look, you're just going to have to face facts: walmart has been forced to capitulate into raising wages. So the organizing drive is working out well.
Click to expand...

so you've been a worker all your life.. good for you.

you can, at any time, provide substantiation to your claim that Wal Mart capitulated to unions.... your opinion is not substantiation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom