Wal-Mart gives the finger to DC?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-07-2013, 02:30 PM
RE: Wal-Mart gives the finger to DC?
I am not 100% sure what that means Lienda, but it made me laugh.

I'm not anti-social. I'm pro-solitude.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-07-2013, 04:45 PM
RE: Wal-Mart gives the finger to DC?
(11-07-2013 08:52 AM)cjlr Wrote:  
(11-07-2013 07:56 AM)Elesjei Wrote:  The "raising minimum wage will make our corporations run away" fear may have some truth when it comes to manufacturing, but for retail? If there is a retail store shaped hole in DC and Walmart doesn't fill it because they don't want to pay higher wages, then someone else will. Even with the higher wages stores will still be profitable since grunt wages usually account for a small part of expenses. Someone will be glad to meet the demand and make a lot of money from it. Walmart will only have lost potential money as a result of their asshattery.

Someone like, say, Costco.

Who generally employ full-time workers, pay them more than minimum wage, provide healthcare and other benefits, fill a very similar retail niche, and - here's the important part - are more profitable per employee than Walmart.

"Fuck everybody" business practices aren't good business.

Costco is drooling at the mouth. Okay we'll take your spots. They already got one in DC and how will this new "living wage" affect them? Not one wit 'cause they already meet it. Fuck WalMart, I do almost all my shopping at Costco. Friendly and very fucking efficient employees. I've been in lines that looked like this is gonna be a 1/2 hour at least and it was 5-10 minutes. Happy employees make dedicated employees make efficient employees make happy customers make dedicated customers. And their Kirkland Signature brands now are not only cheaper than national brands, they're higher quality as well. Costco for the win. WalMart and Sam's Club can go to fucking wage-slave hell.

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-07-2013, 05:03 PM
RE: Wal-Mart gives the finger to DC?
I wish their was a Costco even within an hour of me. Nearest one is two hours away, and it's a damn shame because I (along with a lot of other people I know) would love to give them our business. Hopefully they expand my way soon.

"History teaches us that no other cause has brought more death than the word of god."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-07-2013, 08:16 PM
RE: Wal-Mart gives the finger to DC?
Raising the minimum wage does nothing good for poor people. This is a stupid outdated notion that has never worked in my opinion.

It devalues the dollar making everything go back to the way it was in the long run, so nothing is is accomplished by that.

Let's say Bob makes minimum wage at 7 bucks an hour. His rent is 700 a month. Minimum wage is raised to 9 dollars an hour. Bob is super excited, he will have money left in his pocket after he pays his rent. Next year the rent will be adjusted to 900 per month. Bob is in the same place he was in before.

Potential benefits are temporary at best

You can't easily increase the value of a dollar again so this means more money needs to be printed (I'll spare my criticisms of The Fed for the sake of brevity). More money being printed means you will need to hire more people to print money, you will need more supervisors administrators and bureaucrats to look over it all. You may need to buy more equipment. You will have to buy more resources to print with (ink, paper, metal (for coins, and engraving and so forth), this means less resources available on the market. The price of all these things comes from tax dollars, which the government gets from everyone, less money in everyone's pocket.

It also means that companies will cut what they can to recoup some losses. Employee training, fringe benefits, insurance, any retirement matching and pensions, etc will decrease or be done away with entirely. While this is meant as a temporary measure to recoup money anytime a company cuts it is difficult to get reinstated again, even after the market has restabilized. The problems caused by all of this is bad as well, it reduces company efficiency, they may have to reduce jobs, they may have a strike against them (which costs the company money whether successful or not, so they are more inclined to cut benefits).

It also causes a surge in job turnover to other minimum wage jobs. If they are getting paid the same a x company doing easier work (or work they think will be easier/more enjoyable), then people are going to try for it. This means the experience level at jobs are lower which reduces efficiency as well.

It also caused companies to try and replace people with machines which was not feasible before.

I know some of you think I am full of shit, but do me a favor, do a bit of research before you call me a unemphatic asshole. Higher minimum wages do nothing good for long, and ultimately do more harm than good. If you are really interested in the damage done by causing inflation then I suggest reading up on central privatized banking.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-07-2013, 09:05 PM
RE: Wal-Mart gives the finger to DC?
I shuffled a couple of your points around in order to make mine clearer. Hope it doesn't seem confrontational; I've found economics to be even more divisive than the old classics religion and politics - probably because it is generally a political opinion adhered to with a religious fervour. Anyway.

(11-07-2013 08:16 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  It devalues the dollar making everything go back to the way it was in the long run, so nothing is is accomplished by that.

That happens anyway. The portion of the economy comprised by minimum-wage earners and their expenses is miniscule. Inflation happens regardless of their situation, so one whose wages are not increasing in nominal terms is being paid less in real terms.

(11-07-2013 08:16 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  Let's say Bob makes minimum wage at 7 bucks an hour. His rent is 700 a month. Minimum wage is raised to 9 dollars an hour. Bob is super excited, he will have money left in his pocket after he pays his rent. Next year the rent will be adjusted to 900 per month. Bob is in the same place he was in before.

That's... rather dubious. In a long term, aggregate sense, it is a factor. But far from the only or even most relevant one.

(11-07-2013 08:16 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  Potential benefits are temporary at best...

Yes. But as far as working within the system goes, that's about all one can do. Plus, if the only drawback is, "the effects are temporary", then the trivial response is, "then do it again".

(11-07-2013 08:16 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  It also means that companies will cut what they can to recoup some losses. Employee training, fringe benefits, insurance, any retirement matching and pensions, etc will decrease or be done away with entirely...

That's already been done for many low-level employees, anywhere and as far as it's legal to do so.

(11-07-2013 08:16 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  It also causes a surge in job turnover to other minimum wage jobs. If they are getting paid the same a x company doing easier work (or work they think will be easier/more enjoyable), then people are going to try for it.

Uh, that's true regardless of what the minimum wage actually is.

(11-07-2013 08:16 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  You can't easily increase the value of a dollar again so this means more money needs to be printed (I'll spare my criticisms of The Fed for the sake of brevity). More money being printed means you will need to hire more people to print money, you will need more supervisors administrators and bureaucrats to look over it all. You may need to buy more equipment. You will have to buy more resources to print with (ink, paper, metal (for coins, and engraving and so forth)), this means less resources available on the market. The price of all these things comes from tax dollars, which the government gets from everyone, less money in everyone's pocket.
(11-07-2013 08:16 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  I know some of you think I am full of shit, but do me a favor, do a bit of research before you call me a unemphatic asshole. Higher minimum wages do nothing good for long, and ultimately do more harm than good. If you are really interested in the damage done by causing inflation then I suggest reading up on central privatized banking.

Actually, you seem quite emphatic Tongue.

Inflation in the broadest sense is purely a consequence of growth. The population increases, consumption per capita increases, productivity increases - economic activity increases. Given the nature of economies (economy; noun: a mass consensual hallucination of large numbers of volatile, fallible human beings) I can't really imagine anything being particularly better than the muddle we've got now.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-07-2013, 10:56 PM
RE: Wal-Mart gives the finger to DC?
(11-07-2013 09:05 PM)cjlr Wrote:  I shuffled a couple of your points around in order to make mine clearer. Hope it doesn't seem confrontational; I've found economics to be even more divisive than the old classics religion and politics - probably because it is generally a political opinion adhered to with a religious fervour. Anyway.

Well, it is confrontational, but that's kind if of the point, isn't it? You aren't going to hurt my feelings by being critical of my views. I got alligator skin when it comes to politics. Thumbsup

(11-07-2013 08:16 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  It devalues the dollar making everything go back to the way it was in the long run, so nothing is is accomplished by that.

cjlr Wrote:That happens anyway. The portion of the economy comprised by minimum-wage earners and their expenses is miniscule. Inflation happens regardless of their situation, so one whose wages are not increasing in nominal terms is being paid less in real terms.


It is true that inflation would be happening anyway, especially because of the Fed, but I see that as no reason to shrug it off and say 'fuck it, full speed ahead' if ya' know what I mean. Another more important factor to address is that our currency isn't anchored, or back by anything that we cannot produce, like gold and silver. I know you weren't commenting on the latter, just felt the need to type it. Some people may take this as a knock down drag out fight and complain that they didn't say that. As far as I'm concerned we are discussing, even though we have opposing views. Thumbsup





(11-07-2013 08:16 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  Let's say Bob makes minimum wage at 7 bucks an hour. His rent is 700 a month. Minimum wage is raised to 9 dollars an hour. Bob is super excited, he will have money left in his pocket after he pays his rent. Next year the rent will be adjusted to 900 per month. Bob is in the same place he was in before.

cjlr Wrote:That's... rather dubious. In a long term, aggregate sense, it is a factor. But far from the only or even most relevant one.

I will just disagree that it's dubious. It's a simplification, for the sake of brevity and ease of conversation, but I think it is a much more important factor than yourself. I could cite studies conducted by x university, or organization, and you could probably find something as well to contradict it and we could argue about how such and such as biased...but let's skip that shall we? I can provide sources upon request though, if you wanted. A simple google search is all that's needed though.

You're right, there are plenty of other factors, I just think it is a very relevant one.
(11-07-2013 08:16 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  Potential benefits are temporary at best...

cjlr Wrote:Yes. But as far as working within the system goes, that's about all one can do. Plus, if the only drawback is, "the effects are temporary", then the trivial response is, "then do it again".

No, we could also quit interfering in the system so much, but I know what you'd likely say in response. Austrian Economics vs Whatever label you wish.

(11-07-2013 08:16 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  It also means that companies will cut what they can to recoup some losses. Employee training, fringe benefits, insurance, any retirement matching and pensions, etc will decrease or be done away with entirely...

cjlr Wrote:That's already been done for many low-level employees, anywhere and as far as it's legal to do so.

Exactly. So quit fucking with it, it isn't working.

(11-07-2013 08:16 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  It also causes a surge in job turnover to other minimum wage jobs. If they are getting paid the same a x company doing easier work (or work they think will be easier/more enjoyable), then people are going to try for it.

cjlr Wrote:Uh, that's true regardless of what the minimum wage actually is.

Yeah, but now there is MUCH more of it. Creating artificial bubbles means there is a bottom. You can't fuck up and take a hit to your pay.

(11-07-2013 08:16 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  You can't easily increase the value of a dollar again so this means more money needs to be printed (I'll spare my criticisms of The Fed for the sake of brevity). More money being printed means you will need to hire more people to print money, you will need more supervisors administrators and bureaucrats to look over it all. You may need to buy more equipment. You will have to buy more resources to print with (ink, paper, metal (for coins, and engraving and so forth)), this means less resources available on the market. The price of all these things comes from tax dollars, which the government gets from everyone, less money in everyone's pocket.
(11-07-2013 08:16 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  I know some of you think I am full of shit, but do me a favor, do a bit of research before you call me a unemphatic asshole. Higher minimum wages do nothing good for long, and ultimately do more harm than good. If you are really interested in the damage done by causing inflation then I suggest reading up on central privatized banking.

cjlr Wrote:Actually, you seem quite emphatic Tongue.

Inflation in the broadest sense is purely a consequence of growth. The population increases, consumption per capita increases, productivity increases - economic activity increases. Given the nature of economies (economy; noun: a mass consensual hallucination of large numbers of volatile, fallible human beings) I can't really imagine anything being particularly better than the muddle we've got now.

Inflation isn't purely a consequence a growth. A consequence of growth is a cause of inflation, a consequence of collapse is inflation, a consequence of having nothing anchoring your currency is inflation, a consequence of printing money with no oversight is inflation, a consequence of regulation is inflation. While I know we can do much worse, I also believe we could do much better. Unfortunately I do not believe that we WILL do much better, so eh, what can you do. Vote and complain I suppose.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-07-2013, 08:47 AM
RE: Wal-Mart gives the finger to DC?
(11-07-2013 10:56 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  
cjlr Wrote:That happens anyway. The portion of the economy comprised by minimum-wage earners and their expenses is miniscule. Inflation happens regardless of their situation, so one whose wages are not increasing in nominal terms is being paid less in real terms.


It is true that inflation would be happening anyway, especially because of the Fed, but I see that as no reason to shrug it off and say 'fuck it, full speed ahead' if ya' know what I mean. Another more important factor to address is that our currency isn't anchored, or back by anything that we cannot produce, like gold and silver. I know you weren't commenting on the latter, just felt the need to type it. Some people may take this as a knock down drag out fight and complain that they didn't say that. As far as I'm concerned we are discussing, even though we have opposing views. Thumbsup

I didn't mention it because metallism is just demented fetishism (and I mean that in the anthropological sense). All currency is imaginary and all currency is backed by mutual understanding. Whether it's source. The difference is in how much of it there can be. Since shiny rocks are finite and electronic data isn't (well - isn't in a meaningful way as opposed to a theoretical way), that obviously limits monetary inflation, but has plenty of its own problems.

(11-07-2013 10:56 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  
(11-07-2013 08:16 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  Let's say Bob makes minimum wage at 7 bucks an hour. His rent is 700 a month. Minimum wage is raised to 9 dollars an hour. Bob is super excited, he will have money left in his pocket after he pays his rent. Next year the rent will be adjusted to 900 per month. Bob is in the same place he was in before.

cjlr Wrote:That's... rather dubious. In a long term, aggregate sense, it is a factor. But far from the only or even most relevant one.

I will just disagree that it's dubious. It's a simplification, for the sake of brevity and ease of conversation, but I think it is a much more important factor than yourself. I could cite studies conducted by x university, or organization, and you could probably find something as well to contradict it and we could argue about how such and such as biased...but let's skip that shall we? I can provide sources upon request though, if you wanted. A simple google search is all that's needed though.

You're right, there are plenty of other factors, I just think it is a very relevant one.

Agree to disagree at best, I think. Obviously wage increases are commensurate with inflation (but, being a cause and an effect, I think it's a bit naive to say it's only a cause). Minimum wage earners are such a tiny part of the overall economy that I find it extremely hard to believe that they're a prime driver of price increases. And my other point still stands; given a situation in which inflation is already occurring, a wage that is not increasing in nominal terms is decreasing in real terms.

(11-07-2013 10:56 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  
(11-07-2013 08:16 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  Potential benefits are temporary at best...
cjlr Wrote:Yes. But as far as working within the system goes, that's about all one can do. Plus, if the only drawback is, "the effects are temporary", then the trivial response is, "then do it again".

No, we could also quit interfering in the system so much, but I know what you'd likely say in response. Austrian Economics vs Whatever label you wish.

Austrian school? And I thought you were cool... Big Grin

But now I'm curious, since even I don't know what I'd likely say.

(11-07-2013 10:56 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  
(11-07-2013 08:16 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  It also means that companies will cut what they can to recoup some losses. Employee training, fringe benefits, insurance, any retirement matching and pensions, etc will decrease or be done away with entirely...
cjlr Wrote:That's already been done for many low-level employees, anywhere and as far as it's legal to do so.

Exactly. So quit fucking with it, it isn't working.

Fucking with what? What isn't working? The above has occurred regardless of minimum wage increases (which, for that matter, have not occurred in most US states).

(11-07-2013 10:56 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  
(11-07-2013 08:16 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  It also causes a surge in job turnover to other minimum wage jobs. If they are getting paid the same a x company doing easier work (or work they think will be easier/more enjoyable), then people are going to try for it.
cjlr Wrote:Uh, that's true regardless of what the minimum wage actually is.

Yeah, but now there is MUCH more of it. Creating artificial bubbles means there is a bottom. You can't fuck up and take a hit to your pay.

I'm afraid I don't see the connection. People working minimum wage are in exactly the same situation. The number of jobs doesn't magically change. So individual circumstances don't either...

(11-07-2013 10:56 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  Inflation isn't purely a consequence a growth. A consequence of growth is a cause of inflation, a consequence of collapse is inflation, a consequence of having nothing anchoring your currency is inflation, a consequence of printing money with no oversight is inflation, a consequence of regulation is inflation. While I know we can do much worse, I also believe we could do much better. Unfortunately I do not believe that we WILL do much better, so eh, what can you do. Vote and complain I suppose.

Well, okay - it's a consequence of growth and human nature (well, and debt). An increasing economy and fixed money supply mean the amount per person goes down. People don't like numbers to go down, they like them to go up (the "this one goes to eleven" principle). Regulations are necessary insofar as capital has gravity, and once it becomes too concentrated the effects are mostly negative (and also because large groups of people are pretty much amoral by definition, so if a society wants or expects moral behaviour...).

Given the definition of economy (well - my definition above) it's going to be a muddle regardless. Much as a democracy was once described as "the worst of all possible forms of government, except for all others that have been tried". If people's relative well-being remains more or less constant (increase is too much to hope for), then I don't particularly give a shit how many zeros are on the bills.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-07-2013, 12:08 PM
RE: Wal-Mart gives the finger to DC?
Is it wrong to say I never knew what Walmart was until I moved to Oregon in 2004? Is it wrong to say that I've never been inside one?


When tears are in your eyes and you can't find the way
It's hard to make believe you're happy when you're gray
Baby, when you're feelin' like you'll never see the mornin' light
Come to me..Baby, you'll see -- The Four Seasons

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-07-2013, 02:33 PM
RE: Wal-Mart gives the finger to DC?
(12-07-2013 12:08 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  Is it wrong to say I never knew what Walmart was until I moved to Oregon in 2004? Is it wrong to say that I've never been inside one?

No, that's a rotten cherry you definitely don't want to pop. Wink

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
12-07-2013, 02:44 PM
RE: Wal-Mart gives the finger to DC?
(12-07-2013 02:33 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(12-07-2013 12:08 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  Is it wrong to say I never knew what Walmart was until I moved to Oregon in 2004? Is it wrong to say that I've never been inside one?

No, that's a rotten cherry you definitely don't want to pop. Wink

Thanks for the imagery. Now I will switch sexual preferences. Sorry Ladies. Wink

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: