It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Wage Required to Afford a 2-Bedroom Rental in Every State

page: 13
24
<< 10  11  12    14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 12 2015 @ 10:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs

This is a quote from Ron Unz:

The data by that Berkeley research center you mentioned shows that Wal-Mart, the largest low-wage employer in America, could accommodate the costs of a $12-an-hour minimum wage nationally by simply raising their prices 1 percent one time.


ONE PERCENT. One Time.
That's it.



So the question is why do they not do it then. Think about it... They take a big hit for being the bad guy, this does affect their bottom line, so why not be the good guy that everyone loves and shops at? Seems like a win win for all doesn't it?

So Walmart margin is less than 6%, so yes they would need to raise prices, but 1% is not really the right amount. They have a very tight margin in a very competitive market and any prices raises would reduce over all sales and so they would need to raise their prices even more, and so you might see a 10% increase, drop in revenue even then and Walmarts closing. The vast majority of people who shop there make under 40k a years as a family. Pennies count to them enough they would go to a different store. I make more than that and I think the selection at Walmart sucks so I tend to go to specialty stores more, that cost more, but I get a better selection. As example: They decided to not build 3 Walmarts in DC because the minimum wage was raised to 12.38 and Walmart said they can not work with that. If they could make profit with it then they would, that part is plain and simple.

In the end it is not an easy thing to figure out as some guys propaganda might lead you to believe.




posted on Jun, 12 2015 @ 10:44 AM
link   
In Memphis, TN the rent is ridiculous even in the less desirable areas. Some places are $400.00 and up and some of these places are so gang and crime ridden most don't let their children outside.

I think if the owners of these buildings allowed tenants to actually purchase their unit, if might make a big difference. Many have never owned their own home and probably have given up on that idea. I feel owning something, you will take better care of it and it would help give a sense of pride and possibly help to start breaking the cycle of poverty that many are born into.

Just a thought



posted on Jun, 12 2015 @ 11:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero


So Walmart margin is less than 6%, so yes they would need to raise prices, but 1% is not really the right amount.


Sorry, but I will take a Silicon Valley Billionaire's word over yours.

Compare Walmart's Sams Club to Costco. Both require memberships to shop there. Both sell in bulk. Costco pays MUCH MORE and has better benefits. AND not only are its employees NOT on the dole, its annual profits are HIGHER.

The High Cost of Low Wages
And this was from 2006....!!


Though the businesses are direct competitors and quite similar overall, a remarkable disparity shows up in their wage and benefits structures. The average wage at Costco is $17 an hour. Wal-Mart does not break out the pay of its Sam’s Club workers, but a full-time worker at Wal-Mart makes $10.11 an hour on average, and a variety of sources suggest that Sam’s Club’s pay scale is similar to Wal-Mart’s.

A 2005 New York Times article by Steven Greenhouse reported that at $17 an hour, Costco’s average pay is 72% higher than Sam’s Club’s ($9.86 an hour). Interviews that a colleague and I conducted with a dozen Sam’s Club employees in San Francisco and Denver put the average hourly wage at about $10. And a 2004 BusinessWeek article by Stanley Holmes and Wendy Zellner estimated Sam’s Club’s average hourly wage at $11.52.

On the benefits side, 82% of Costco employees have health-insurance coverage, compared with less than half at Wal-Mart. And Costco workers pay just 8% of their health premiums, whereas Wal-Mart workers pay 33% of theirs. Ninety-one percent of Costco’s employees are covered by retirement plans, with the company contributing an annual average of $1,330 per employee, while 64 percent of employees at Sam’s Club are covered, with the company contributing an annual average of $747 per employee.

Costco’s practices are clearly more expensive, but they have an offsetting cost-containment effect: Turnover is unusually low, at 17% overall and just 6% after one year’s employment. In contrast, turnover at Wal-Mart is 44% a year, close to the industry average.
...
In return for its generous wages and benefits, Costco gets one of the most loyal and productive workforces in all of retailing, and, probably not coincidentally, the lowest shrinkage (employee theft) figures in the industry.

While Sam’s Club and Costco generated $37 billion and $43 billion, respectively, in U.S. sales last year, Costco did it with 38% fewer employees...Costco’s stable, productive workforce more than offsets its higher costs.


These figures challenge the common assumption that labor rates equal labor costs. Costco’s approach shows that when it comes to wages and benefits, a cost-leadership strategy need not be a race to the bottom.


So. There.
"SOME GUY'S propaganda"? Really?

Spare me. He is an independently wealthy businessman from California, who made millions .....a Harvard graduate, and way up there in the top fraction of a percent....
please look him up so you'll know he's not just "some guy."



edit on 6/12/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 12 2015 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Great numbers!

If you treat people like humans, you get better workers, less turnover, stealing, ect...

Walmart doesn't care though. They've no doubt run the numbers and they're making more paying less, regardless of turnover, shrinkage and all the other things mentioned.



posted on Jun, 12 2015 @ 11:40 AM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Thanks for acknowledging. One of the 'arguments' is that Costco caters to more affluent people. Okay, fine. Better quality goods. Excellent, no problems there. You get what you pay for, and all that.

So, some say, "Well, not everyone can AFFORD to shop at Costco!"

To which the obvious reply is:

"Right! And why is that? It's because they don't EARN ENOUGH MONEY."


People don't seem to realize that using taxpayer money to subsidize the deficit (re cost of living) of the workers wages, just so they can SURVIVE, is costing us $250 BILLION per year -
if we get them a living wage (such as Costco's) - we have far fewer people needing assistance, and far more people able to shop at Costco.

It makes perfect sense to me.



posted on Jun, 12 2015 @ 11:51 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I'm not very affluent and shop at Costco. No one I see at Costco seems wealthy. None of the vehicles in the parking lot look like they belong to wealthy people.

What do I see at Costco? HUGE families. People with 10 kids. Large religious families like the Duggars. This is why you never, ever go to Costco on a Sunday between 11am-3pm. It's pure mayhem.

The products at Costco are grocery store products for the most part, but in bulk. You can buy the same grocery store brands.

The membership is what, $100 a year? Even that is refundable though due to their awesome refund policy. If you buy lots of frozen meals for lunches (for work or something) Costco is totally worth it. I buy my protein powder there. Paper products like toilet paper and paper towels are cheap there, so is laundry soap and dish washing detergent.

I don't get the whole "upscale" image of Costco. I see a lot of down and out people in the two Costcos in my town. They can make their money go farther from buying in bulk. Costco also does "bush" orders and will put items on pallets and have them air freighted to the Native Alaskan villages for cheap. The natives come into town for various reasons from their tiny remote villages and STOCK UP at Costco. These natives aren't rich by any means...



posted on Jun, 12 2015 @ 11:57 AM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

And all the while, Costco's profits BEAT Sam's Club.

Thanks for the 'stay away on Sunday after church' reminder (kind of like deciding to go for brunch after sleeping off a Sat night party) - lol!



posted on Jun, 12 2015 @ 12:07 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Pretty much ANY "family" restaurant like Dennys, I-Hop or the like you want to avoid. The same with any place that has the food items printed on plastic menu boards above a cash register. Those are known places people take their ill-behaved kids to on Sunday.

As a child-less person, I avoid almost ALL public places from 11am-3pm on Sunday. I don't want your kid running into me, blowing out my ear drums from a tantrum, or having to deal with you and your 3-shopping cart-caravan at the check out line (seriously, you look like you are from Lawrence of Arabia with three full carts, traversing the desert caravan style) .

No. I prefer to stay far, far away from people and their supersized families on Sunday. This is my "witching hour". The first sign it's about to begin is usually when I pass the first minivan with the stick figure family sticker in the back window. I know I'm in for a bad time when I spot my first one of the day on Sunday..



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 01:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
Sorry, but I will take a Silicon Valley Billionaire's word over yours.


Good, then we are done. I put forth numbers and you will believe what you will. Walmart has very little factor in minimum wage. One advice... Don't shop at Walmart, don't work there either, now everything is good.



A 2005 New York Times article by Steven Greenhouse reported that at $17 an hour, Costco’s average pay is 72% higher than Sam’s Club’s ($9.86 an hour). Interviews that a colleague and I conducted with a dozen Sam’s Club employees in San Francisco and Denver put the average hourly wage at about $10. And a 2004 BusinessWeek article by Stanley Holmes and Wendy Zellner estimated Sam’s Club’s average hourly wage at $11.52.


I love Costco, but their margin is like 1.68%, they are betting it all on grabbing market shares then they will raise prices and/or reduce/fix wages. At some point they will need to increase margins to survive.



Costco’s practices are clearly more expensive, but they have an offsetting cost-containment effect: Turnover is unusually low, at 17% overall and just 6% after one year’s employment. In contrast, turnover at Wal-Mart is 44% a year, close to the industry average.


They went after the middle/upper middle class by having yearly enrollment fees that eliminates about 50% of America shopping there. Walmart caters to the poor where price is number one over quality.



While Sam’s Club and Costco generated $37 billion and $43 billion, respectively, in U.S. sales last year, Costco did it with 38% fewer employees...Costco’s stable, productive workforce more than offsets its higher costs.


Like I said earlier, Walmart can fire 40% of their employees and pay the rest more, that is an option too.



Spare me. He is an independently wealthy businessman from California, who made millions .....a Harvard graduate, and way up there in the top fraction of a percent....
please look him up so you'll know he's not just "some guy."


I'm sure all Harvard grads do not speak propaganda...

I'm not debating with you about Walmart, I have already said they could raise their pay, but not to what people in this thread suggest is a living wage, and why should they? They have 100 people applying for every position as is...I also suggest that when you are talking low margins it is not an easy thing to do as you and your Harvard grad suggests, though it can be done. I'm more worried about the other 100 million that do not work for some evil corp and forcing a single person living wage on every business will drive most out of business.


edit on 13-6-2015 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 01:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
I don't get the whole "upscale" image of Costco. I see a lot of down and out people in the two Costcos in my town. They can make their money go farther from buying in bulk. Costco also does "bush" orders and will put items on pallets and have them air freighted to the Native Alaskan villages for cheap. The natives come into town for various reasons from their tiny remote villages and STOCK UP at Costco. These natives aren't rich by any means...


I do not think I have ever spent less than 200 bucks at Costco any time I have gone there. Walmart is where the vast majority of the poor shop, period, and the poor can not afford Costco...


edit on 13-6-2015 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 01:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Great numbers!

If you treat people like humans, you get better workers, less turnover, stealing, ect...

Walmart doesn't care though. They've no doubt run the numbers and they're making more paying less, regardless of turnover, shrinkage and all the other things mentioned.



At the end of the day Walmart still only gets less than a 6% margin... How do you work with that when your customer base are those who will shop some place else because an item is 10 cents less.... I do shop at Costco and I do not even look at prices, I just buy what I want to buy, but if all I had was 40 bucks I would go where I can..

1. Get to for the least amount of gas, or walk i.e. million of Walmarts
2. Get the most out of my 40 bucks buying single items since I can't even buy one 3 gallon mustard jar to save over all...



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 03:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Great numbers!

If you treat people like humans, you get better workers, less turnover, stealing, ect...

Walmart doesn't care though. They've no doubt run the numbers and they're making more paying less, regardless of turnover, shrinkage and all the other things mentioned.



Want to know why they can run the numbers that way? They get lots of tax breaks for it. Disgruntled employees steal things? Insurance and taxes. Training time for employees? Tax deductions. And so on down the list. Costco doesn't have to do that, where as Walmart does what's cheaper because the government incentivizes them to treat people like dirt.



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 08:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

At the end of the day, Costco is MORE profitable than Sam's Club, and its employees are paid a living wage.

Believe whatever you want. Your figures don't change the facts. Enjoy continuing to subsidize Walmart's employees with your tax dollars so they can live in a building somewhere and have something to eat. God knows the owners who employ them should not have to stoop to such levels of humanity!

edit on 6/13/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 09:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

A quick google search said that walmart's 2012 revenue was 446 billion and its profit margin was 3.5%.

That's still $15,610,000,000 in pure profit. It looks to me they can offer up some more pay without hiking prices.



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 11:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs

At the end of the day, Costco is MORE profitable than Sam's Club, and its employees are paid a living wage.


Well at 1.68% margin they are not.



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 11:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: EternalSolace
a reply to: Xtrozero

A quick google search said that walmart's 2012 revenue was 446 billion and its profit margin was 3.5%.

That's still $15,610,000,000 in pure profit. It looks to me they can offer up some more pay without hiking prices.


I agree... Like I said many times I hate Walmart, don't shop there and will never work there, but at 3.5% that is tight numbers.

Every dollar raise will cost them 5 billion per year....so roughly a 3 dollar raise would give them zero profit.



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

Then they shouldn't be in business if they can't afford to pay their employees more then government subsidies.



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 12:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

If a three dollar raise would cost them 5 billion a year, that's still 10.6 billion in profit a year. That's a very small price to pay to invest in your employees.



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 01:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: onequestion

Then they shouldn't be in business if they can't afford to pay their employees more then government subsidies.


Ok, that is one way, but what we are talking about is to enforce double or more as to what their business is asked to do today. I guess in your mind no job is better than a 10 buck an hour job....



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 01:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: EternalSolace
a reply to: Xtrozero

If a three dollar raise would cost them 5 billion a year, that's still 10.6 billion in profit a year. That's a very small price to pay to invest in your employees.


No, 5 billion is around ONE dollar raise. 3 dollars would be most of their profits...

2,100,000 employees X 1 dollar = 2,100,000 dollars

40 hours x 52 weeks = 2080 work hours in a year

2080 x 2,100,000 dollars = 4.36 billion dollars needed per year to increase one dollar pay raise.



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 10  11  12    14  15 >>

log in

join