Walmart now selling LSD laced meat.

I think in part the issue is that there needs to be a more realistic minimum wage set. I do feel that someone who is working for one of these companies should be paid far more than they are now. Unless the government sets the minimum wage at a rate above poverty it allows companies to not pay more.

Companies put forth the scenario that it will force jobs to be eliminated and while that could happen short term, long term it will lead to a better standard of employment and living. Most companies now with the economy operate with reduced staffing and reality is that they need to maintain staff so it will level out.

 

Imma start buying my steaks from walmart.

 

The average wage at Costco is $17 an hour, Sam's Club pays an average of $10 an hour. Costco is also the more successful business, with 50% of the market, compared to 40% for Sam's Club. More from this article, if you feel like reading about it:

 

:2thumbsup:

I knew that Costco takes the prize over Walmart, thank you for taking the time.

 

One of my best friends has been working for Costo for 20 yrs. He started in the early 90s for around $12/hr back when the minimum was less then $5. But's it's more a skilled job working there and they pay their employees accordingly. I can't imagine paying a McDonalds worker anywhere even close to that. The minimum wage is right where it should be.

 

no. the minimum wage is less in real terms, in what how much will buy, then it was when first created. IF it had been tied to the inflation rate and kept pace with it, you MIGHT have a point. but no one should be paid less then it costs them to live. the REAL reason people ARE on food stamps and other assistance, is because they ARE being paid less then it costs them, just for food and rent, to live. and that's not even counting transportation to get TO work!

a buck and a quorter in 1960, would be closer to $20 then $10 today.

 

Not as long as taxpayers are picking up the deficit it isn't where it should be. More than half of all fast food workers are on some form of public assistance to the tune of 7 billion dollars annually, of which McDonalds alone is responsible for almost 1.2 billion.
The fact is we are all paying for what Mcdonalds and others are not paying their workers.
This is more like corporate welfare the way I see it, our tax dollars going to support the minimum wage workers who can't make a living so that McDonalds CEO's can live like cigar chompin' millionaires! :biker:

Aren't we all the suckers now!

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-12/mcdonald-s-8-25-man-and-8-75-million-ceo-shows-pay-gap.html
"Twenty years ago, when Tyree Johnson first started at McDonald's, the CEO's compensation was about 230 times that of a full-time worker paid the federal minimum wage. The $8.75 million that Thompson's predecessor as CEO, Skinner, made last year was 580 times, according to data compiled by Bloomberg."

 

and its NOT like CEO's do anything that skillful or educated to earn it.

a scientist or an engineer might deserve a hell of a lot more then what they actually get, but a CEO don't EARN shit.

 

If employees are on public assistance because their employer does not pay them enough thats their fucking problem, and the government should cut them off. It's not mine, Mcdonalds or anybody elses responsibility but their own. I used to work a shit paying job and never went on public assistance. Instead found a skill I was good at and got into something that actually had future and now I make 10x what used to make in the past.

If an employer is not paying you enough get off you lazy ass and get a education and find yourself a career. If you uneducated and lazy well that your problem and you can work for shit pay.

 

wrong. get your head out and look around. real life doesn't work that way. and the only reason i can imagine anyone not understanding that it doesn't is if they were born with a silver spoon and are still being pampered by mommy and daddy.

 

So do you think underpaid workers who get off their lazy ass should be able to take government assistance for the several years it will take them to complete a degree? Or maybe get paid a livable wage? Or just suffer, maybe live in a tent and use the public library for school work?

Oh and what about those with kids? How should they pay for daycare while they work and go to school and support a child on minimum wage?

 

How is that wrong? That exactly how real life works. You get paid what you're worth and if not find a job that does. You don't cry about it and say "pay me more wah wah wah"

I don't think anybody should be on gov assistance. Hell I had friend who was making $20,000/month and fudged the paper work and got Section 8 to pay his rent.

And if you're gonna have kids make sure you can fucking afford it in this day and age there's no excuse. I grew up in the hood and seen lots of people have kids for the sole purpose of getting a paycheck from the government.

And anyone taking a minimum wage job expecting that to pay for their families is a fool. Minimum wage jobs are minimum for a reason, because they are low skill and have high turn over. These kinds of jobs are meant for high school kids who need gas money not someone trying to raise a family.


The REAL solution to this problem is not paying people more money it's stopping this out of control inflation that makes the dollar worth less and less every year. If we can fix that then everything will be more affordable for everybody.

 

I think you're ignoring the reality of the situation. Teenagers don't fill most positions at wal mart and fast food restaurants anymore. Most of the work force in minimum wage jobs is made up of adults. I actually don't remember the last time I saw a teenager working at wal mart. Most of these people have little to no skills to work elsewhere, although I know plenty of people who work low end jobs while in school. Still, unless you're under 22 you're more than likely going to have to deal with supporting yourself while in school.

Controlling inflation is a nice thought, but it isn't helping the 1.2 million people employed by wal mart afford rent in the meantime.

Plus, inflation is a constant. The whole point of minimum wage is to keep up with inflation.

 

those adults are working those 2nd jobs cause they buy their teenagers everything..

 

I didn't say it was teenagers working these jobs, I said jobs at that pay level are meant for teenagers and people starting out in life. And I've been to Walmart and have seen the people that work there and they aren't much different then the people who shop there.

I could never justify paying someone at Walmart the same wage a Costco employee makes, and if a Walmart employee wants to make what a Costco employee makes they should try to get a job at Costco. Oh and the reason Walmart can get away with paying shit wages is because people don't care as long as they can get their cheap goods from China. If people really did care they wouldn't shop there and Walmart would have gone out of business years ago.

Increasing the minimum wage is only going to increase inflation, they go hand in hand. The more money people have the more prices are going to go up. Inflation isn't a constant because the government keeps printing more money everyday making it an out of control variable. The government needs to stop printing money like its going out of style because it's making everything go up in price and has done nothing to help this economy.

 

This statement is slighty ignorant. I say that respectfully. I've known... Three people come to mind, who educated themselves in fields they're naturally inclined or skilled in and it got them no where.

Philosophy Major - Guy makes and delivers pizza as well as does construction odd jobs.
English Masters degree - Worked at a bank wicket (no education needed, glorified salesman)
Chemistry Masters degree - Had to choose between Tim Hortons job (Canadian Duncan Donuts) and McDonalds job.

See, unfortunately these fields aren't terribly necessary to the economy. Especially in the last 8 years.

So, the get off your ass and get a job or a degree theory isn't a solid one.

 

More money in circulation = better economy = cheaper goods

Less money in circulation = worse economy = more expensive goods (as less money is being traded).

Your statement is contradictory.

 

Actually I think you just proved my point. Lets break it down. I'm making assumption because I don't know all the facts so please correct me if I'm wrong.

Philosophy Major - Guy makes and delivers pizza as well as does construction odd jobs.

First off this is a useless degree. However it's sounds like he did what he had to do and got a job rather then go on welfare.

He's also working in construction. Construction jobs pay pretty good even if it's only a temp job. So my guess is this person is making more then minimum with his two jobs.

This does not sounds like a lazy and unmotivated person to me.

English Masters degree - Worked at a bank wicket (no education needed, glorified salesman)

Again another useless degree unless you plan on being a teacher or some shit. If he's working in sales then he's probably making a commission. A good sales person can easily make many times more then the minimum. Again, this sounds like a person who is taking care of business and not crying about minimum wage not paying enough.

Chemistry Masters degree - Had to choose between Tim Hortons job (Canadian Duncan Donuts) and McDonalds job.

Again, unless your going to be a teacher or scientist there's not much you can expect from this degree. A major part of this problem is we have all these people coming out of college with useless education. The days when a degree guaranteed you a good paying job ended year ago, and yet students are still buying into this false illusion of making 6 figures after graduation with a degree in Basket Weaving or some shit.

Is this person on welfare, probably not. Are they using this job as a stepping stone until something better comes along? Hopefully yes, if not then they deserve to make the minimum.

It's well known that the more you have of something the less valuable it becomes, thats why gold and diamonds are so expensive.

When the gov prints more money the value of the dollar drops compared to other currencies and things like gold and silver and goods become more expensive. When they print less money it rises and goods cost less. It's a technique the Fed and banks have used for hundreds of years to keep the dollar at levels they want. Look at what happened in Zimbabwe, they printed so much money that it became worthless to the point a loaf of bread costed $50 billion Zimbabwe dollars.

Now the gov has been printing money like crazy for the last Imma say 10 or so years. Look at how much more expensive things have become, things like gas, milk, are more then double what they were 10 years ago. And the economy has not gotten any better, to me it actually seems worse.

 

This model that you present would be applicable if this were along the lines of a government bail out where they are propping up the funds.

In the case we are talking about it is instead a stimulus to the economy as the funds that would be used to raise wages are from the profits of the company rather than federal funds.

Two different scenarios.

 

But the money all comes from the same place. You can make for money if there isn't more money. Thats why Wallstreet wants to Fed to keep printing more money, its easy money for them and more profits in the pockets.