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.

 

Wal-Mart Cannot Afford the $10 Wage

page: 13
18
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 11:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: corvuscorrax

It is the damn Ayn Rand fantasy.

I got mine so screw you get yours.


No one GAVE me crap. I have worked hard my whole life.

So, yeah, screw you.


Except for that 800 dollars yiur dad gave you. Well I don't have a family to get frees from

Let that sink in . If you didnt have 800 bucks then you wernt doing all that great in the first place

And without your handout you might just be woking at walmart trying to survive

We don't all have family we can borrow from

Now I don't take gov handouts either

But then again I live in a van and struggle just to keep gas in it and food in my stomach

Get in touch with reality




posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 12:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

I'll put extra money in a cashier's pockets at the expense of a stockholder every day of the week. And that includes any stock I may have in my own 401k, or any hit to my future pension. Every day of the week!



posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

It drives me crazy when people equate someone's net worth -take one of the Walton kids, for example - their "net worth" includes the stock value of their share of the WalMart corporation. That worth is not liquid - it is paper. They do not have $XXbillion sitting in their bank accounts. Large bricks and mortar companies have huge operating costs, with labor being the biggest. WalMart's margins may be higher than other stores, but they are not so high that they can easily absorb a 10 or 20% increase in labor costs. I wish low-IQ voters know at least one thing about business, but they don't.



posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 12:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: usernameconspiracy
a reply to: Metallicus

I'll put extra money in a cashier's pockets at the expense of a stockholder every day of the week. And that includes any stock I may have in my own 401k, or any hit to my future pension. Every day of the week!


Do you have a 401k? You are probably a stockholder if you do. Do you think "stockholders" are all rich people chomping on cigars in their cardigans, watching dog racing? Educate yourself in business, for your own good.

The cost will be added operating expenses, which will affect profit margins, which will affect stock price. It is not a direct drain on select "rich cigar-chomping stockholders" like you think it is.



posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 12:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: HighDesertPatriot

originally posted by: usernameconspiracy
a reply to: Metallicus

I'll put extra money in a cashier's pockets at the expense of a stockholder every day of the week. And that includes any stock I may have in my own 401k, or any hit to my future pension. Every day of the week!


Do you have a 401k? You are probably a stockholder if you do. Do you think "stockholders" are all rich people chomping on cigars in their cardigans, watching dog racing? Educate yourself in business, for your own good.

The cost will be added operating expenses, which will affect profit margins, which will affect stock price. It is not a direct drain on select "rich cigar-chomping stockholders" like you think it is.


The stock market just needs to get its expectations in order. WalMart is still making a huge profit. Costco pays a living wage and look at its stock price over the last 5 years. Costco 5 year stock price
So I call BS on they cannot afford to pay. Costco proves they can and the company is doing really well.
edit on 15-10-2015 by blargo because: Fixed typo



posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 01:24 PM
link   
a reply to: HighDesertPatriot

yes, it's much better that the taxpayers all pitch in and help the employees with food stamps and rental assistance, and child care, even when after they get done paying all those taxes they can't even take their own sick kid to the doctors let alone invest in a 401k retirement plan!!!
it's simple really, if a job requires a living breathing person to do it, then the person doing that job is worth the money it takes to keep them living and breathing. it shouldn't be the taxpayers job to keep employees feed, housed and healthy so they can do a job adequately on the behalf of a few highly valued managers and the stockholders!
hey I got an idea, let's drop the safety nets, ya know make these employees have to come up with the money for their childcare, their food, their rent, and their healthcare, and well, let's see where those 401k's are standing then.



posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

Labor is a commodity - like anything else. It's value should move up and down - like flour, gasoline and gold

Flipping burgers is unskilled - but it's still labor. It still has a value. The cost of everything goes up

Should we keep the price of labor artificially low so it won't affect profit or the shareholders? Slavery is no longer possible - but there's no good reason to pay for labor if it can be at all avoided - right?

God knows we all depend on their trickles... We should all just count ourselves lucky to be able to lick out the crap that falls into the cuffs of their pants

This country should Norma Rae itself into a kind of ginormous mutiny against these captains of industry. If some people are really all that concerned about the torches and pitchforks heading their way - they might want to consider some reasonable ways to avoid it

In my own life - just recently - I've witnessed the kind of profit that's made from immigrant labor. People you don't have to actually pay - you just have to promise to pay them. Someday

Be patient amigo - now back up on the roof you go...

I think we've reached a point in our society where some people think success is the same thing as honor or integrity



posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 01:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: blargo

originally posted by: HighDesertPatriot

originally posted by: usernameconspiracy
a reply to: Metallicus

I'll put extra money in a cashier's pockets at the expense of a stockholder every day of the week. And that includes any stock I may have in my own 401k, or any hit to my future pension. Every day of the week!


Do you have a 401k? You are probably a stockholder if you do. Do you think "stockholders" are all rich people chomping on cigars in their cardigans, watching dog racing? Educate yourself in business, for your own good.

The cost will be added operating expenses, which will affect profit margins, which will affect stock price. It is not a direct drain on select "rich cigar-chomping stockholders" like you think it is.


The stock market just needs to get its expectations in order. WalMart is still making a huge profit. Costco pays a living wage and look at its stock price over the last 5 years. Costco 5 year stock price
So I call BS on they cannot afford to pay. Costco proves they can and the company is doing really well.


of course it's a excuse.....raising workers pay to a livable wage, cuts into the wealth of the investors, which is a no-no in business.....by the way, those "rise in operating expenses from workers wage hikes" is not as much as the "wealth class" let's on.



posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 02:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: HighDesertPatriot
a reply to: Metallicus

It drives me crazy when people equate someone's net worth -take one of the Walton kids, for example - their "net worth" includes the stock value of their share of the WalMart corporation. That worth is not liquid - it is paper. They do not have $XXbillion sitting in their bank accounts. Large bricks and mortar companies have huge operating costs, with labor being the biggest. WalMart's margins may be higher than other stores, but they are not so high that they can easily absorb a 10 or 20% increase in labor costs. I wish low-IQ voters know at least one thing about business, but they don't.


here's the numbers.....seems that I am one of your "low-IQ voters"....because when I look at their financial statements, I see that they project all those raises to cost 1 billion dollars....for 2014, their gross sales were 476.29 billion, gross income was 118.23 billion, and net income was 15.88 billion. apparently they will "survive"...here's the article that shows what the company expects to pay in increased wages...
knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu...

here's the short version of Wal-mart's financial statement...
www.marketwatch.com...



posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 02:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: usernameconspiracy
a reply to: Metallicus

I'll put extra money in a cashier's pockets at the expense of a stockholder every day of the week. And that includes any stock I may have in my own 401k, or any hit to my future pension. Every day of the week!


Get back to me when you've retired and can't work anymore and have to depend on your SS plus anything that might be in that retirement account for your livelihood.



posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 02:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

Pardon me asking but what do you pay your employees? I somehow think it may be at least 10$ an hr. Thank you for creating jobs sir because the only thing that creates jobs are jobs.



posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 02:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blazemore2000
Yeah.... what a shame people want an actual living wage. How dare they?



People who want to earn a living wage shouldn't work at Walmart. Alternatively one can work two jobs. I've worked two jobs until I could find one that paid enough @ 40 hours/week. You should see the fat slobs that "work" at Walmart. They aren't going hungry that's for sure.



posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 02:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom

originally posted by: Metallicus
This is just one more step in what is coming in the new gimme gimme economy as the self-described disenfranchised generation takes from those that work hard and save for their own retirement and destroy the existing economy to usher in a new age of Government taking care of us.
Wal-mart Stock Plummets



Takes from those who work hard? What is there to take when you barley make enough to survive?



I hope he was referring to the company and the shareholders. If they accepted a deal from Wal Mart that damaged their retirement, it's not the workers fault.



posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 02:54 PM
link   
a reply to: ShadowsOfEridu

so, who should be working at wal mart? kids?? only they are open 24/7 and kids have restrictions as to what hours they can legally work, don't they?? college kids?? ya sure, have you looked at their tuition costs lately, seems to me, they really could use a living wage, just like every other adult.
as far as working two jobs, well, okay, but know there was a time when one job, even as a cashier in a store, was enough to support themselves.

and, well, I don't go shopping at wal mart that often but quite frankly, their pay is about the same as any other store, so I've got to say, from what I've seen the store clerks seem to come in all shapes and sizes.



posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 02:58 PM
link   
Propaganda and fear tactics. Rich peoples greed is soaring to new heights.

The US can fund a huge military, terrorize the world and prop up countries and corporations but doesn't really care much about it's citizens.



posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 03:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: usernameconspiracy
a reply to: Metallicus

I'll put extra money in a cashier's pockets at the expense of a stockholder every day of the week. And that includes any stock I may have in my own 401k, or any hit to my future pension. Every day of the week!


Get back to me when you've retired and can't work anymore and have to depend on your SS plus anything that might be in that retirement account for your livelihood.


Will do. I'm pretty sure I'll be alright regardless of whether the minimum wage is eight, ten, twelve, or fifteen dollars. Some poor millionaires might get grumpy because their annual dividends brought in a few hundred thousand less than they thought, but they too, will be alright.



posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 03:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

No its not that they now pay a real wage.

Its that the can't compete with internet sales.
Why walk all over a big box store, wait in long lines because they can't have a somebody accidentally not busy. and park a couple hundred yards/meters from the door when you can
order with a few clicks and have it show up at your door?



posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 04:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: prisoneronashipoffools

Nice rant.

Let me know when you are ready to back that up with facts.



Facts? Those were all facts. After all what do you dispute? That the US didn't enter into the trade deals which opened the door to outsourcing? That the majority of the manufacturing base was removed from the country? That those jobs are essential to the functioning of the united states economy and the ability for people to provide for their families? Or the fact that the majority of jobs created since then have been primarily in two sectors, government positions and service industry?

Those are all facts, but if you are asking for proof of numbers well here you go.

Source


Jobs outsourced to China have diminished American employment opportunities and have helped contribute to wage erosion since 2001, when China entered the World Trade Organization, new research shows.

Between 2001 and 2013, the expanded trade deficit with China cost the U.S. 3.2 million jobs, and three quarters of those jobs were in manufacturing, according to a report released Thursday from the Economic Policy Institute, a left-leaning Washington think tank. Those manufacturing jobs lost accounted for about two-thirds of all jobs lost within the industry over the 2001 to 2013 period.


That is 3.2 million jobs. Career jobs that allowed people to directly exit high school, to be hired and make enough money to eventually, buy a car, a house, to take care of children, to put aside for their education and even put away money for retirement. And they are all gone. what has replaced them is mostly service industry jobs. That is the problem. And until we as Americans wake up and see the true devastation the trade deals have done to our economy, and repeal them or change them. It's not going to get any better.

Frankly I think you are missing the bigger picture and that is they united states a former production powerhouse has been gutted by the trade deals and as long as they are in place this country and this economy is doomed. You seem more interested in trying to help a couple of the people find a better job and get by, by getting educated or looking in this place or that, while letting the whole country burn. Well as long as it's not you right. Well it will be you eventually.

You can believe the talking heads in the media telling you the economy is great and lying about the real unemployment numbers, but the truth is in the wind and it smells like death for the American economy.



edit on 15-10-2015 by prisoneronashipoffools because: typos

edit on 15-10-2015 by prisoneronashipoffools because: typos



posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 04:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Thecakeisalie




That is priceless. You are telling folk to work hard and study hard yet you got a loan from dear old dad. Do you know how that sounds?


This is so true, plus he says he "risked everything". I was wondering what the hell he risked? Sounds like his daddy had all the risk



posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 04:32 PM
link   
a reply to: ShadowsOfEridu

Sorry, but weight has little to do with how much you eat and more to with what you eat. 4 ounces of cucumbers, versus 4 ounces of ice cream are not equal. If you haven't been taught how to do it right, healthy eating is more expensive and more time consuming. If I was working at wal-mart all day, I am not sure I would have the energy to cook every thing from scratch like I do now. I would probably opt for quicker and less healthy meals too.

And yes, an overweight person is starving. They are starving for nutrients, since the foods they eat, unknowingly to most of them have few to none.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join