D.C. Council votes to Force Walmart to pay "living wage"--50% over minimum wage.

Hate to burst anyone's "Wealth Distribution" bubble, but you can force wage raises all you want, all that is going to happen is that companies are going to pass that cost onto........YOU the consumer. You are not going to hurt the business.


Hope you feel better.

Originally posted by peck420

Originally posted by Garkiniss
The OPs title is misleading. This bill won't just affect Wal-Mart, though their behaviour was the catalyst to the bill being passed in the first place.

You are about 15 years behind the times if you need it spelled out that Walmart is synonymous with large retail outlet.

Now that that is covered....who is next?

D.C. lawmakers gave final approval Wednesday to a bill requiring some large retailers to pay their employees a 50 percent premium over the city’s minimum wage, a day after Wal-Mart warned that the law would jeopardize its plans in the city.

"Some" not "a" not "Walmart"... "Some"
It's the first paragraph in the link. Hell, it's the first sentence.

Reading... it's both fun and mental.

If Wal-Mart wants to pitch a bitch and feel singled out over this move, then that's fine.
Cry me a river. A company that rakes in 400(+) billion in profits each year can afford a nice violin to play me a tune.

reply to post by pavil


If I had magical powers this is what I would do:

1. Raise not only the minimum wage, but everyone's wages.
2. I would mandate that any company that is involved in commerce in the USA freeze their prices.

This would never, ever happen. But I would essentially be trying to bring down the cost of living index AND raising everyone's salaries at the same time.

Never happen, but that is why I prefaced this with, "If I had magical powers"

reply to post by MystikMushroom

If I had magical powers this is what I would do:
1. Raise not only the minimum wage, but everyone's wages.

…At whose expense?

2. I would mandate that any company that is involved in commerce in the USA freeze their prices.

…what about inflationary policy and taxes?

I think you should direct your super powers at the US gubment and TPTB instead of Joe-Business (your neighbor).

Originally posted by Garkiniss

If Wal-Mart wants to pitch a bitch and feel singled out over this move, then that's fine.
Cry me a river. A company that rakes in 400(+) billion in profits each year can afford a nice violin to play me a tune.

Really???? 400 BILLION profit?? There's this thing called the internet, you should utilize it sometime.

Wal-Mart slipped to No. 2 in the Fortune 500 in 2011 after holding onto the top spot for two years in a row. The retailer was forced to aggressively cut prices to reverse its declining same store sales in the U.S. That helped push revenues up by 6% during 2011, to $447 billion, but it hurt Wal-Mart's bottom line -- profits declined by 4.6% during the year, to $15.7 billion.

It's 447 Billion in Revenue and 15.7 Billion in profit. That's a 3.5% profit margin. Most businesses couldn't function on that kinda spread .Actually that puts them in about the 26th best industry for profit margin.

Don't let facts get in the way of your belief.


Source

Source

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
reply to post by pavil

 

If I had magical powers this is what I would do:

1. Raise not only the minimum wage, but everyone's wages.
2. I would mandate that any company that is involved in commerce in the USA freeze their prices.

This would never, ever happen. But I would essentially be trying to bring down the cost of living index AND raising everyone's salaries at the same time.

Never happen, but that is why I prefaced this with, "If I had magical powers"

Now I know why you picked your name........

Take a look historically what happens when you do the things you suggest. I bet you would be surprised. It's been tried, the results are not pretty.

reply to post by pavil

Really???? 400 BILLION profit?? There's this thing called the internet, you should utilize it sometime.

Do you know how many MILLIONS of people own Wall-Mart stock? Do you know how many MILLIONS of people are employed by Wall-Mart? Do you know that PROFIT isn’t a bad thing much less illegal?

How is your internetz working at your house?

reply to post by seabag


Please re-read my post. I think you have misunderstood it.

Originally posted by Garkiniss

"Some" not "a" not "Walmart"... "Some"
It's the first paragraph in the link. Hell, it's the first sentence.

Reading... it's both fun and mental.

If Wal-Mart wants to pitch a bitch and feel singled out over this move, then that's fine.
Cry me a river. A company that rakes in 400(+) billion in profits each year can afford a nice violin to play me a tune.

edit on 31-7-2013 by Garkiniss because: (no reason given)

You are correct in one thing...reading is fun.

Every company that operates under the 'Walmart Business Model', will be getting hit by this surcharge.

Neat! They named a business model after Walmart...I wonder why they did that? Oh yea, because Walmart pioneered a successful large retail strategy.

So, yes, Walmart is synonymous with every large retail store that follows their model.

For the record, Costco and Target tried to follow that model, but never managed to make it work....which is why they tested a different model. Of which Costco is on their 3rd attempt.

Not that any of that matters.

If we assume that every single Walmart employee is a minimum wage, part time employee, and this legislation goes Walmart wide, they will be loosing approx $6 billion a year.

Reading is fun!

You should really try Walmart's financial papers.

Originally posted by pavil
reply to post by seabag

 

Please re-read my post. I think you have misunderstood it.

If I didn't understand the first time I likely won't the second.

Where did I go wrong, friend?

reply to post by pavil

edited out, already covered

Originally posted by seabag

Originally posted by pavil
reply to post by seabag

 

Please re-read my post. I think you have misunderstood it.

If I didn't understand the first time I likely won't the second.

Where did I go wrong, friend?

I'm not picking a fight with anyone, merely pointing out that Walmart's profit margin isn't obscene and in fact much lower than other industries. I agree Profit is good. Do you think that Walmart making $3.50 off of each $100 of sales is too much? I suggest you run a business on that kind of margin.

It's really "fun".

Originally posted by peck420

Neat! They named a business model after Walmart...I wonder why they did that? Oh yea, because Walmart pioneered a successful large retail strategy.

So, yes, Walmart is synonymous with every large retail store that follows their model.

For the record, Costco and Target tried to follow that model, but never managed to make it work....which is why they tested a different model. Of which Costco is on their 3rd attempt.

Costco is doing significantly better than Sam's Club, and I've got news for you, it isn't because they're following Walmart's lead. Both companies (Sam's and Costco) began the same year, yet Costco is miles ahead in terms of employee treatment. If Walmart was following Costco's model for employee relations, then we wouldn't be having this discussion, and that bill would've never seen the floor.

Walmart's business model, while great for investors, is terrible for employees and toxic for small communities.

Target, on the other hand, also has a better employee track record, and they're now winning in the "low price" race against Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart may have set the standard, but their inability to evolve, to tap into anything resembling ethical, is what's hurting their image.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not giving a pass to any of these companies. They could all stand to pay a little more to their workers.

reply to post by seabag


Look, if Joe Business wants to sell more sprokets, he needs customers that have money to buy them.

Let me repeat myself: he needs customers with enough money to buy them

If our purchasing power is decreasing every year, how are supposed to support local businesses? The only thing left is to buy cheaper goods from multi-national corporations, which hurts Joe Business.

At who's expense? Money these days is nothing but numbers in a computer. It is manipulated all the time. All it would take is to wipe out all the financial computers and start from scratch. Physical assets would remain property of their respective owners if we did this.

All I see is greed and "mine mine mine!" -- well you didn't build that huge company all by yourself. It took customers with money, and employees to make the product marketable.

If you ignore the worker, the entire system crumbles. I feel like a broken record.

So what is your net worth, may I ask? Or are you just brainwashed by the your wealthy overlords?

reply to post by pavil


That's why I said if I had magical powers.

I wouldn't be successful at my job if the people underneath me didn't do a good job. They do a good job because they know I'll take care of them. I get better quality work, which outweighs any kind of sacrifices I have to make (which aren't much...donuts on Fridays for example).

That's a small example, but there has to be a balance between profitability and maintaining a stable working class that doesn't rely on government assistance.

Originally posted by pavil

Really???? 400 BILLION profit?? There's this thing called the internet, you should utilize it sometime.

Wal-Mart slipped to No. 2 in the Fortune 500 in 2011 after holding onto the top spot for two years in a row. The retailer was forced to aggressively cut prices to reverse its declining same store sales in the U.S. That helped push revenues up by 6% during 2011, to $447 billion, but it hurt Wal-Mart's bottom line -- profits declined by 4.6% during the year, to $15.7 billion.

It's 447 Billion in Revenue and 15.7 Billion in profit. That's a 3.5% profit margin. Most businesses couldn't function on that kinda spread .Actually that puts them in about the 26th best industry for profit margin.

A slip on my behalf. Pardon me.

That 447 Billion dollars also makes it one of the larger economies on this planet, carrying a larger GDP than 170 other countries, including Norway and Venezuela. If Wal-Mart were a country, it would have the 23rd largest GDP in the world. Between the years 1992 and 2007, Wal-Mart has been blamed for the closing of 60,000 independent retail stores. They're creating unemployment everytime they open their doors, and do nothing to reverse that. Why? They feed on the poor like some sick monetary vampires.

Walmart rakes in 5x more in regards to profits than the first runner-up.

As for the 15 billion in net profits. For 4 billion they could give every single one of their employees a 2k per year raise. That's not asking a lot considering that the combined net worth of the six members of the Walton family is roughly equal to the combined net worth of the poorest 30% of all Americans (that's about 93 million people, btw).

Again, Wal-Mart isn't garnering sympathy from me.

reply to post by pavil

I'm not picking a fight with anyone, merely pointing out that Walmart's profit margin isn't obscene and in fact much lower than other industries. I agree Profit is good. Do you think that Walmart making $3.50 off of each $100 of sales is too much? I suggest you run a business on that kind of margin.

It's really "fun".

Those margins are horrible for any business. I just didn't know what you meant.

I understand the effects of payroll on a business and I think mandating wages at state or federal levels beyond the current federal standard is obscene and intrusive. It's always easy to spend other people's money. I'm tired of people asking government to violate the free market!

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
reply to post by pavil

 

That's why I said if I had magical powers.

I wouldn't be successful at my job if the people underneath me didn't do a good job. They do a good job because they know I'll take care of them. I get better quality work, which outweighs any kind of sacrifices I have to make (which aren't much...donuts on Fridays for example).

That's a small example, but there has to be a balance between profitability and maintaining a stable working class that doesn't rely on government assistance.

So did you start paying them more in hopes that they would do a better job or did you give them raises "for" doing a job? It's a very important distinction.

I give my employee's incentives for exceeding goals, ie making me more money. I have no problem with that, you know, a rising tide lifts everyone. If I make more money, I don't mind rewarding my good employees for that increase, but if government is going to tell me what to pay people regardless of their merit, regardless of my actual profit margin, then I will just pass that cost along. I refuse to pay people more for mediocre or poor job performance.

Some here are suggesting a 3.5% profit is too much and suggest they cut that profit by about 25%, would you do that in your business?

reply to post by seabag


Third times the charm..... no worries.

Originally posted by MuzzleBreak

D.C. lawmakers gave final approval Wednesday to a bill requiring some large retailers to pay their employees a 50 percent premium over the city’s minimum wage, a day after Wal-Mart warned that the law would jeopardize its plans in the city.

The retail giant had linked the future of at least three planned stores in the District to the proposal. But its ultimatum did not change any legislators’ minds. The 8 to 5 roll call matched the outcome of an earlier vote on the matter, taken before Wal-Mart’s warning.

articles.washingtonpost.com...

Forget supply and demand. Typical childish thinking from Usual Suspects. Some jobs that require little skills or knowledge simply aren't worth even minimum wage. No one should expect to be able to live independently on minimum wage jobs. Without incentive, motivation, our society will be more screwed than it is.

I see no problem with it, pass the cost onto the companies that bypass minimum wage to hire slave labor in China. And are we really feeling sad for Walmart here? The company that put millions of traditional stores out of business with their monopoly?